Bamboo Taxonomy and Diversity in the
Era of Molecular Markers
MALAY DAS,* SAMIK BHATTACHARYA,{ PARAMJIT SINGH,{
TARCISO S. FILGUEIRAS,} AND AMITA PAL{
*US Environmental Protection Agency, National Health and
Environmental EVects Research Laboratory, Western Ecology
Division, 200 S.W. 35th Street, Corvallis 97333, Oregon
{
Plant Molecular & Cellular Genetics, Bose Institute,
Kolkata 700054, India
{
Botanical Survey of India, CGO Complex, Salt Lake,
Kolkata 700064, India
}
Reserva Ecológica do IBGE, C.P. 08770,
Brasilia‐DF 70312‐970, Brazil
I. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A. Origin, Systematic Position and Habit ....................................
B. Geographical Distribution ..................................................
C. Use ..............................................................................
D. Chromosome Number and Genome Size .................................
II. Implications of Various Morphological
Features in Bamboo Taxonomy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A. Rhizomes ......................................................................
B. Branching, Bud and Leaf Characters......................................
C. Inflorescence, Flower and Fruit Characters ..............................
III. Bamboo Classifications Based on Morphological Features . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
IV. Conspectus of Woody Bamboo Genera of the World . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
V. Relevance of Molecular Taxonomy in Bamboo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Advances in Botanical Research, Vol. 47
Incorporating Advances in Plant Pathology
Copyright 2008, Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
226
226
227
229
229
230
230
231
233
235
238
239
0065-2296/08 $35.00
DOI: 10.1016/S0065-2296(08)00005-0
226
M. DAS ET AL.
VI. DNA Fingerprinting‐Based Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A. RFLP ...........................................................................
B. RAPD ..........................................................................
C. SCARs .........................................................................
D. AFLP ...........................................................................
E. Microsatellites (SSRS)........................................................
F. Expressed Sequence Tag Derived Microsatellites (EST‐SSR) .........
G. Transposon ....................................................................
VII. DNA Sequence‐Based Methods. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A. Organellar Genes .............................................................
B. Nuclear Genes ................................................................
VIII. Summary and Future Directions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A. Morphological Systematics and Identification ...........................
B. Molecular Systematics and Identification.................................
C. Future Scope of Comparative Genomics .................................
D. Genetic Diversity and Ecology .............................................
. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
240
240
240
242
242
243
244
244
245
245
250
252
252
256
258
259
260
260
ABSTRACT
A total of 1400 species of bamboos are grouped under the sub‐family Bambusoideae
within the family Poaceae. The plant group harbours both herbaceous and woody
members while the taxonomy has traditionally been dependent on morphological
characters. Classification systems proposed to date need further support, and taxonomic delineation at lower levels often lack suYcient resolution. Infrequent flowering
events and extensive genome polyploidization are an additional challenge for the
woody group. The tremendous advancement of molecular marker technologies
holds the promise to address diVerent needs of bamboo taxonomy (systematics and
identification) and diversity studies. One of the most important prerequisites is to
apply the appropriate molecular tool at the proper taxonomic level. More studies are
required to better understand the population level genetic diversity in bamboo.
I. INTRODUCTION
A. ORIGIN, SYSTEMATIC POSITION AND HABIT
Bamboos are members of the sub‐family Bambusoideae within the grass
family Poaceae. Grass family is monophyletic and the early diverging lineages
recognized within the family are Anomochlooideae, Pharoideae and Puelioideae (Grass Phylogeny Working Group [GPWG], 2001). Anomochlooideae
lacks a true spikelet and is sister to the rest of the family members. Pharoideae
is the earliest lineage from the true spikelet‐bearing group and was followed
by Puelioideae. The earliest fossil evidence for grasses was reported
BAMBOO TAXONOMY AND DIVERSITY
227
sometimes between Paleocene and Eocene ages (Crepet and Feldman, 1991).
According to the fossil species of Pharus, the early diversification of the family
started between late Eocene and early Oligocene (Poinar and Columbus,
1992) and extensive diversification occurred by Miocene (Thomasson, 1987).
Most possibly, the major radiations of the grasses including Bambusoideae
happened 40–50 million years ago (Malcomber et al., 2006). Very recently the
first petrified bamboo fossil, Guadua zuloagae sp. nov, was reported from the
Pliocene age (Brea and Zucol, 2007).
Traditionally, the members of the group share some common features that
include rhizomatous habit, hollow segmented culms, petiolate blade with
tessellate venation, flowers with three or more lodicules, usually with six
stamens, and fruit possess small embryo and linear hilum (Soderstrom,
1981). Few synapomorphic features which are unique for Bambusoideae
were reported by GPWG (2001). Leaf blade is mainly constituted of mesophyll tissue with asymmetrically invaginated arm cells, while pseudo‐petiole
structures are secondary gain for the sub‐family. It is broadly divided into
two tribes, that is Bambuseae/woody bamboos and Olyreae/herbaceous
bamboos depending on the presence (Bambuseae) or absence (Olyreae) of
the abaxial ligule (GPWG, 2001; Zhang and Clark, 2000).
B. GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION
Bamboos are distributed all over the world, but major species richness is
found in Asia Pacific (China: 626, India: 102, Japan: 84, Myanmar: 75,
Malaysia: 50 and few others) and South America (Brazil: 134, Venezuela: 68,
Colombia: 56 and few others) while least (5) in Africa (Bystriakova et al.,
2003a,b). The herbaceous bamboos with 110 species are mostly concentrated in the Neotropics of Brazil, Paraguay, Mexico, Argentina and West
Indies (Judziewicz et al., 1999, Fig. 1). Brazil is the most prominent place
representing 89% of the genera and 65% of the species that are reported from
the New World (Filgueiras and Goncalves, 2004). The largest natural bamboo forests, known as ‘tabocais’ in Brazil and ‘pacales’ in Peru, cover 600,000
ha across Brazil, Peru and Bolivia (Filgueiras and Goncalves, 2004). The
woody bamboos are unique with complex branching patterns, woody culm
and gregarious, monocarpic flowering (Fig. 2). There are 1290 species and
they are universally distributed except in Europe which has no native species.
They are classified into three major groups: the paleotropical woody bamboos
(distributed in tropical and sub‐tropical regions of Africa, Madagascar, India,
228
M. DAS ET AL.
120 °W
80 °W
40 °W
0°
40 °E
80 °E
120 °E
160 °E
180 °E
Arctic circle
40 °N
Tropic of cancer
0°
Tropic of capricorn
40 °S
Herbaceous bamboo
Neotropical woody bamboo
Pleotropical woody bamboo
Temperate woody bamboo
Fig. 1. World distribution of woody (paleotropical, neotropical, temperate) and
herbaceous bamboos (modified and compiled from http://www.eeob.iastate.edu/
research/bamboo/maps.html).
Fig. 2. An example of gregarious flowering in woody bamboo (Thamnocalamus
spathiflorus subsp. spathiflorus) covering an area of 3.5 km2 at an altitude of 3000 m
in Sikkim, India (recorded during August 2006).
Sri Lanka, Southern China, Southern Japan and Oceania, Fig. 1), the neotropical woody bamboos (Southern Mexico, Argentina, Chile, West Indies)
and the north temperate woody bamboos (mostly in North temperate zone
and few at high elevation habitats in Africa, Madagascar, India and Sri Lanka,
http://www.eeob.iastate.edu/bamboo/maps.html).
BAMBOO TAXONOMY AND DIVERSITY
229
C. USE
Bamboos are popularly known as poor man’s timber for their multipurpose
use in the rural life of many Asian countries. Thin culms with narrow cavities
are popularly used as umbrella handles, fishing rods and flutes, while mature
culms are widely used in constructing mud huts, mats, baskets and fences.
Highly nutritious leaves (Khatta and Katoch, 1983) as well as young shoots
are often used for preparing delicious soups and pickles. Adult culms are
useful for the production of high quality charcoal (Park and Kwon, 1998)
along with the fibres which are ideal for paper and pulp production. Because
of a high growth rate (typically matures within 5–7 years) plus a number of
important fuel characteristics such as low ash content, alkali index or heating
value, bamboo is a promising energy crop for future (for details, see Scurlock
et al., 2000). The fate of a number of endangered as well as wild species is
intimately linked with bamboos (http://www.unep.org/cpi/briefs/Bamboo).
For instance, leaves of Sasa senanesis, S. kurilensis and S. nipponica constitute a major part of the winter diet for Hokkaido voles (Clethrionomys
rufocanus) when most other plants wither (Stenseth et al., 2003). In central
Brazil, the wild stands of Actinocladum verticillatum and Filgueirasia spp.
constitue a valuable fodder resource for both livestock and wildlife during
the dry season when rest of the vegetation sheds their leaves (Filgueiras,
2002). The hollow bamboo culms provide refuge to many invertebrates and
the inadvertent link to giant panda is well known.
D. CHROMOSOME NUMBER AND GENOME SIZE
The basic chromosome number for most woody members is x ¼ 12, the same
as rice, while for herbaceous bamboo it is synapomorphic (x ¼ 11; GPWG,
2001). Occurrence of polyploidization has been reported in the woody
bamboos (Pohl and Clark, 1992; Soderstrom, 1981). Cytological studies
indicated the existence of two distinct sections, tropical (hexaploids,
2n ¼ 6x ¼ 72) and temperate (tetraploids, 2n ¼ 4x ¼ 48) within the woody
group (Clark et al., 1995; Ghorai and Sharma, 1980; Kellogg and Watson,
1993). It was later supported by the flow cytometric estimation of the
genomic DNA content (Gielis et al., 1997a). Temperate bamboos had higher
DNA content (4.17–5.3 pg) than tropical ones (2.34–3.23 pg). According to
the most recent estimate (Gui et al., 2007), the genome size of tetraploid
Phyllostachys pubescens is 2034 Mb, which is 5.4‐fold larger than that of
the diploid cultivated rice and 1.9‐fold larger than that of tetraploid wild rice,
while little less (86.92%) than that of maize genome. Their analysis utilizing
996 genome survey sequences (GSS) covering 0.92 Mb regions revealed that
230
M. DAS ET AL.
23.28% of the genome consisted of repeat elements. Although it indicates that
there might be some direct relationship between the higher genome size and
the proportion of repeat elements present, more coverage is essential prior to
confirming any such presumption. Soderstrom (1981) pointed out that
Southeast Asia is a centre of distribution for tetraploid and hexaploid
bamboos. Hsu (1967, 1972) reported one diploid species of Phyllostachys
and one of Arundinaria from China. Ruiyang (2003) on the basis of an
exhaustive chromosome analysis on 185 species from 33 genera and 6 subtribes has shown the variation in chromosome numbers for some species of
Bambusa and Dendrocalamus.
II. IMPLICATIONS OF VARIOUS MORPHOLOGICAL
FEATURES IN BAMBOO TAXONOMY
Bamboo taxonomy like all other plant groups has traditionally been built
upon various morphological features and several classification systems have
been proposed to date.
A. RHIZOMES
Rhizome is the horizontally grown underground plant part that often sends
out roots and shoots (culms) from its nodes. The existence of two basic forms
of rhizome was first indicated by Riviere and Riviere (1879) on the basis of
their observation of two diVerent growth habits in two bamboo genera. The
caespitose habit was studied in Gigantochloa while the spreading habit was
observed in Phyllostachys. These two diVerent forms of rhizomes were later
recognized as monopodial and sympodial type (McClure, 1925) and were
further redefined as leptomorph and pachymorph type (McClure, 1966). The
terms leptomorph and pachymorph were preferred over monopodial and
sympodial as the later terms were more related to the branching patterns and
clump forms than the actual morphological forms of the rhizome (McClure,
1966). In sympodial type, the culms usually grow in clumps and the rhizomes
are usually short, thickened and spindle shaped (Fig. 3A). Sometimes the
neck length (distance between the point of origin of two culms) in sympodial
rhizome is relatively longer and thus generates less tufted culms that look like
the monopodial rhizome as observed in Melocanna (Fig. 3B). In the monopodial or running type, the rhizome grows horizontally without frequent,
upright culm repetition and hence culms always grow in isolation (Fig. 3C).
They are usually slender and hollow (Wong, 2004). Sometimes a mixed
situation of both monopodial and sympodial types is observed and known
as amphipodial type (Fig. 3D). However, the taxonomic importance of
231
BAMBOO TAXONOMY AND DIVERSITY
A
Root
Short neck
B
Long neck
C
Bud
D
Monopodial
Sympodial
Fig. 3. Basic rhizome types in bamboo. (A) sympodial (pachymorph) rhizome
with short necks, (B) sympodial (pachymorph) rhizome with long necks, (C) monopodial (leptomorph) rhizome with nodal bud and (D) amphipodial (amphimorph)
rhizome with mixed sympodial and monopodial types (redrawn from Soderstrom and
Young, 1983 with permission from Missouri Botanical Garden Press).
rhizome, at least for the old world bamboo at genera or supra‐generic level, is
well recognized (Stapleton, 1997).
B. BRANCHING, BUD AND LEAF CHARACTERS
The first extensive study to understand the importance of branch and
bud characteristics was undertaken by Usui (1957) and was subsequently
carried out by McClure (1966). A fundamental diVerence with respect to the
branching pattern was noticed between the tropical and temperate groups.
A basic and ancestral branching pattern was observed in most tropical
genera, while the temperate group represented both basic (Arundinaria and
232
M. DAS ET AL.
Thamnocalamus) and complex (Fargesia, Yushania and Borinda) branching
patterns (Stapleton, 1994b). Branch complements are most informative at
the mid culm position as they are not well developed at the lower culm body
(Wong, 2004). Chao et al. (1980) have used branching characters to revise
few Asian genera. Bud characteristics have been found to be useful for
resolving generic level confusions. For instance, McClure (1966) treated
Pleioblastus as a synonym of Arundinaria, although they were later diVerentiated by bud closure characteristics. In addition, the taxonomic and
evolutionary significance of prophyll gained special attention. Modification
of prophylls into protective bud‐scale was a result of fusion events, while
sheath reduction can explain insertion of multiple buds as one observed in
Chusquea culeou (Stapleton, 1991).
Two functionally diVerent forms of leaves are observed in bamboo. The
culm leaves (culm‐sheath) play protective roles for younger shoots, while the
green foliage leaves are basically for photosynthetic purposes. The basal part
of culm leaf surrounds the internode, while the upper part is usually free and
known as the sheath blade. The juncture between the two parts is known as
the ligule and is an important taxonomic character. Various other characteristic features such as adaxial plus abaxial hairs, auricle (tiny appendages at
the base of lamina on both sides) and sheath blade are useful for quick
identification of species in the field. Gamble (1896) was the first one to
extensively use various culm leaf features at species level and were later
employed at generic level too (Nakai, 1925). They are often very informative
even for higher taxonomic rank such as sub‐family. For instance, Bambuseae
and Olyreae are clearly diVerentiated on the basis of presence or absence of
the abaxial ligule.
While important culm leaf characteristics were mostly restricted to macro‐
morphology, the anatomical features of foliage leaves gained special attention in bamboo taxonomy. However, conflicts persisted and in many
instances the taxonomic delineation based on the anatomical features was
not fully supported by the morphological features. In one such study, 11
anatomical features of African and Asian bamboos were investigated
(Soderstrom and Ellis, 1982). Arundinaria tessellata shared 10 out of
11 characters with Thamnocalamus spathiflorus and hence the new Thamnocalamus tessellatus was synthesized. However, the closeness between Arundinaria and Thamnocalamus was contradicted by their own datasets that
revealed that only 5 out of 11 characters were overlapping between
A. tessellata and T. aristatus. Similarly, studies on the leaf anatomy of Sri
Lankan bamboo revealed close proximity between Bambusa bamboos and the
members of Arundinariinae rather than other species of Bambusinae
(Soderstrom and Ellis, 1988). It is possible that leaf anatomical characters
BAMBOO TAXONOMY AND DIVERSITY
233
might not be a good choice for generic delineation but could have potential
for lower taxonomic levels.
C. INFLORESCENCE, FLOWER AND FRUIT CHARACTERS
On the basis of the flowering cycle, bamboos have been categorized into three
major groups (Brandis, 1899): annual flowering (Indocalamus wightianus,
Ochlandra sp.), sporadic or irregular flowering (Chimonobambusa sp., Dendrocalamus hamiltonii) and gregarious flowering that occurs at long intervals
with synchronized seeds production (Bambusa bambos, B. tulda, Dendrocalamus strictus). A majority of bamboos belong to the third category where the
intermast period may range from 3 to 120 years (Janzen, 1976).
Like all other grasses, the flowers of Bambusoideae are arranged in bracteate units on the rachilla and are known as spikelets. Each spikelet is
subtended by many empty (without flower) bracts called glumes followed
by one to several specialized bracts called lemma which provides protection
to the flowers (Fig. 4A). In addition to the lemma, each flower is covered by
another bract, sometimes membranaceous, called the palea. Both lemma and
palea are vegetative in origin (Stapleton, 1997). Flowers are sessile and a
proper perianth is substituted by three lodicules. Bracts subtending to bamboo inflorescence followed a gradual reduction process for other grasses in
general. It is believed that the fully bracteate inflorescence such as Bambusa
had to loose bracts to develop the ebracteate grass panicle (Holttum, 1958).
The spikelets of Olyreae are usually unisexual and one flowered. In Bambuseae it is bisexual and both spikelets and pseudo‐spikelets are present. The
later is often bracteate and re‐branching (GPWG, 2001; Judziewicz et al.,
1999). Pseudo‐spikelets are also characterized by the presence of specialized
branch‐bud bearing bracts at the base of the rachilla, which is not observed in
a true spikelet (Fig. 4B). Another important fundamental diVerence is that
true spikelets are always single, while pseudo‐spikelets are in groups.
McClure (1934) first introduced the concept of diVerent types of spikelets
in bamboo. In addition to the idea of spikelets and pseudo‐spikelets, he also
conceptualized semelauctant or determinate and iterauctant or indeterminate inflorescence types (1966). The inflorescence type that had pseudo‐
spikelets as the basic unit was considered as indeterminate because it was
capable of re‐branching and producing new flowers for almost an indefinite
period of time. On the other hand, the determinate inflorescence was primarily based on true spikelets that lack the capability of indefinite growth. Keng
(1983) proposed two sub‐tribes within the woody bamboos (Bambusoideae)
primarily based on the determinate and indeterminate inflorescence types,
which was subsequently adopted in the Flora Reipublicae Popularis Sinicae
234
M. DAS ET AL.
A
Terminal bud
Palea
Floral bud
Lemma
Rachis
Glume
Bract
ProphyII
B
Terminal bud
Palea
Floral bud
Lemma
Rachis
Branch bud
Glume
Bract
ProphyII
Fig. 4. A comparative account of (A) spikelet and (B) pseudo‐spikelet inflorescences. Left panels represent schematic diagrams and right panels represent (A)
spikelet of Chimonobambusa callosa and (B) pseudo‐spikelet of Bambusa tulda.
(FRPS, Keng and Wang, 1996). Recently, a further enhanced version of
FRPS has been published which includes several new taxa and provides a
more detailed account of the Chinese bamboos (Flora of China, 2007).
BAMBOO TAXONOMY AND DIVERSITY
235
It is generally accepted that typical bamboo flowers are monochlamydeous
while the pseudo‐spikelet of Streptochaeta was interpreted as a reduced form
with a single terminal achlamydeous flower (Soderstrom, 1981). However, it
is not always easy to define the inflorescence types in bamboos and several
contradictory interpretations have been noticed in many cases. For instance,
the inflorescence of Racemobambos was recognized as iterauctant by Chao
and Renvoize (1989), while semelauctant by Dransfield (1992). Similar confusion has also been observed for its allied genus Neomicrocalamus. N. prainii
was considered as semelauctant by Keng (1983) and Stapleton (1994c),
while iterauctant by Wen (1986) and Dransfield (1992). The use of the
term synflorescence (aggregation of spikelet) instead of inflorescence has
also been proposed in bamboos (Stapleton, 1997). The various inflorescence
types and floral features are of high taxonomic significance at all levels. For
instance, presence or absence of lodicule is a key character for generic
delineation. The number of stamens is often used to diVerentiate many
closely related genera such as Sinobambusa/Indosasa, Indocalamus/Sasa
and Arundinaria/Acidosasa. On the basis of the absence of ovary appendage,
Holttum (1956) moved the Asiatic species of the genus Oxytenanthera to
either Dendrocalamus or Gigantochloa. Soderstrom and Ellis (1988) described a new genus Pseudoxytenanthera, while Majumdar (1989) created a
new genus Pseudotenanthera to accommodate some of the Indian and Sri
Lankan species.
Bamboo fruits are usually one seeded, dry caryopsis structures, while in few
cases (Melocanna, Dinochloa, Ochlandra) these are fleshy and pear shaped.
III. BAMBOO CLASSIFICATIONS BASED ON
MORPHOLOGICAL FEATURES
Based on gross morphological features, many classification systems have been
proposed till date. Munro’s description (1868) was one of the earliest attempts
that described 170 species under 20 genera. This classification system was
primarily based on that of Nees von Esenbeck (1835). Bentham (1881) followed Nees and Munro with slight modifications and recognized four major
groups. Gamble used important collections and notes of Wilhelm Sulpiz Kurz
(1876), who was contemporary to Munro and had developed a comprehensive
treatise on bamboos of British India (1896). Gamble’s classification covered
15 genera and 115 species with elaborate descriptions and basically followed
Bentham in placing the genera under four groups. Camus (1913) pooled the
information from the work of Munro and Gamble and compiled 490 species
236
M. DAS ET AL.
under 33 genera in his monograph ‘Les Bambusées’. McClure’s description
(1961) of the woody members of Bambusoideae was another landmark that
was further improved by Parodi (1961) who included the herbaceous members in his treatment. He further divided the herbaceous members into three
tribes: Olyreae, Phareae and Streptochaeteae. Soderstrom and Ellis (1987)
considered a total of 11 tribes within Bambusoideae. Five of them were
monophyletic and recognized as ‘core’ Bambusoideae with four herbaceous
tribes (Olyreae, Anomochloeae, Streptochaeteae and Buergersiochloeae) and
one woody tribe (Bambuseae). All the remaining six (Streptogyneae, Puelieae,
Guaduelleae, Phareae, Oryzeae and Zizanieae) were considered as ‘peripheral’
tribes. The proposed ‘core’ Bambusoideae of Soderstrom and Ellis (1987) was
similar to the circumscription proposed by Roshevits (1946) except for
Parianeae. Prat (1960) only considered the woody members within Bambusoideae and moved the herbaceous taxa to Oryzoideae. Clayton and
Renvoize (1986) and Renvoize and Clayton (1992) combined the ‘core’ and
‘peripheral’ Bambusoideae together. They also merged Guaduelleae and
Puelieae to Bambuseae and Buergersiochloeae to Olyreae. They further
subdivided tribe Bambuseae and recognized only 49 genera in three subtribes, that is Arundinariinae (20 genera), Bambusinae (25 genera) and
Melocanniae (4 genera). Tzvelev (1989) recognized the members of ‘core’
Bambusoideae in a separate subfamily and all other grasses were placed
under Pooideae. Watson and Dallwitz (1992) basically supported Clayton
and Renvoize (1986) and Renvoize and Clayton (1992) except Centotheceae,
which was included into Bambusoideae. Kellogg and Campbell (1987) considered Bambuseae as monophyletic based on the presence of woody culms
and the herbaceous bamboos as either monophyletic or paraphyletic to
Bambuseae. In a subsequent study, Kellogg and Watson (1993) also revised
that the ‘core’ Bambusoideae as recognized by Soderstrom and Ellis (1987)
were not monophyletic, but rather polyphyletic. Dransfield and Widjaja
(1995) included 69 woody genera in their description that was further enhanced to 78 in Stapleton’s description (1994a,b,c, 1997). However, one of
the most extensive eVorts to study grass phylogeny and sub‐familial classification has been commenced (GPWG, 2001). The study based on 62 grasses
recognized Poaceae as a monophyletic family (Fig. 5). The earliest diverging
lineages were Anomochlooideae, Pharoideae and Puelioideae. Bambusoideae formed the clade ‘BEP’ along with Pooideae plus Ehrhartoideae and
each of them was supported as monophyletic. One of the most significant
conclusions is to abandon the long‐standing belief that bamboos are the most
primitive grasses as speculated by a large section of bamboo taxonomists
237
BAMBOO TAXONOMY AND DIVERSITY
100
>34
100
15
100
100
32
>34
100
73
4
>34
97
15
36
2
100
17
28
1
>34
29
1
82
7
100
15
96
10
88
7
100
24 100
>34
53
1
100
12
60
2
93
9
93
11
77
3
100
>34
100
>34
100
>34
100
25
61
8
100
20
100
54
100
34
68
2
40
2
71
8
100
100
18
98
15
100
100 >34
27
79
6
100
16
41
3
77
6
32
98
3
11
27
86
3
8
100
10
79
4
99
16
25
85
4
100
17
96
7
2
100
20
87
8
65
3
68
3
68
3
65
2
94
10
100
25
100
32
Flagellaria
Elegia
Baloskion
Joinvillea
Anomochloa
Streptochaeta
Pharus
Guaduella
Puelia
Eremitis
Pariana
Lithachne
Olyra
Buergersiochloa
Pseudosasa
Chusquea
Streptogyna
Ehrharta
Oryza
Leersia
Phaenosperma
Anisopogon
Ampelodesmos
Stipa
Nassella
Piptatherum
Brachypodium
Avena
Bromus
Triticum
Diarrhens
Melica
Glyceria
Lygeum
Nardus
Brachyelytrum
Aristida
Stipagrostis
Merxmuellera m.
Karroochloa
Austrodanthonia
Danthonia
Amphipogon
Arundo
Molinia
Phragmites
Merxmuellera r.
Centropodia
Eragrostis
Uniola
Pappophorum
Zoysia
Spartina
Sporobolus
Distichlis
Eriachne
Thysanolaena
Zeugites
Chasmanthium
Gynerium
Danthoniopsis
Panicum
Pennisetum
Miscanthus
Zea
Micraira
Anomochlooideae
Pharoideae
Puelioideae
Bambusoideae
Incertae sedis
Ehrhartoideae
Pooideae
Aristidoideae
Danthonioideae
Arundinoideae
Chloridoideae
Incertae sedis
Centothecoideae
Incertae sedis
Panicoideae
Incertae sedis
Fig. 5. The most recent grass classification system proposed by Grass Phylogeny
Working Group (2001) (reproduced with permission from Missouri Botanical
Garden Press).
(Clayton and Renvoize, 1986; Tateoka, 1957 and many others) based on the
reproductive plesiomorphic characters such as bracteates, indeterminate
inflorescence or the presence of spikelet like pseudo‐spikelet structures.
238
M. DAS ET AL.
IV. CONSPECTUS OF WOODY BAMBOO
GENERA OF THE WORLD
Most of the recent classification systems (Dransfield and Widjaja, 1995;
Li, 1997; Soderstrom and Ellis, 1987) placed 67 genera of woody bamboos
in nine sub‐tribes. These classification systems were largely dependent on
various floral characters such as type of inflorescence or ovary appendages.
I. SUBTRIBE ARTHROSTYLIDIINAE:
1. Actinocladum, 2. Alvimia, 3. Arthrostylidium, 4. Athroostachys, 5. Atractantha, 6. Aulonemia (Matudacalamus), 7. Colanthelia, 8. Elytrostachys, 9.
Glaziophyton, 10. Merostachys, 11. Myriocladus, 12. Rhipidocladum
II. SUBTRIBE ARUNDINARIINAE:
13. Acidosasa, 14. Ampelocalamus, 15. Arundinaria, 16. Chimonocalamus,
17. Drepanostachyum (Himalayacalamus), 18. Fargesia (Borinda, Yushania),
19. Ferrocalamus, 20. Gaoligongshania, 21. Gelidocalamus, 22. Indocalamus,
23. Oligostachyum, 24. Pseudosasa, 25. Sasa, 26. Thamnocalamus
III. SUBTRIBE BAMBUSINAE:
27. Bambusa (Dendrocalamopsis), 28. Bonia (Monocladus), 29. Dendrocalamus (Klemachloa, Oreobambos, Oxynanthera, Sinocalamus), 30. Gigantochloa, 31. Dinochloa, 32. Holttumochloa, 33. Kinabaluchloa (Maclurochloa,
Soejatmia), 34. Melocalamus, 35. Sphaerobambos, 36. Thyrsostachys
IV. SUBTRIBE CHUSQUEINAE:
37. Chusquea, 38. Nerolepis
V. SUBTRIBE GUADUINAE:
39. Apoclada, 40. Eremocaulon, 41. Filgueirasia, 42. Guadua, 43. Olmeca,
44. Otatea
VI. SUBTRIBE MELOCANNINAE:
45. Cephalostachyum, 46. Davidsea, 47. Leptocanna, 48. Melocanna,
49. Neohouzeaua, 50. Ochlandra, 51. Pseudostachyum, 52. Schizostachyum,
53. Teinostachyum
VII. SUBTRIBE NASTINAE:
54. Decaryochloa, 55. Greslania, 56. Hickelia, 57. Hitchcockella (?),
58. Nastus, 59. Perrierbambus (?)
BAMBOO TAXONOMY AND DIVERSITY
239
VIII. SUBTRIBE RACEMOBAMBOSINAE:
60. Racemobambos (Neomicrocalamus)
IX. SUBTRIBE SHIBATAEINAE:
61. Chimonobambusa, 62. Indosasa, 63. Phyllostachys, 64. Qiongzhuea,
65. Semiarundianria (Brachystachyum), 66. Shibataea, 67. Sinobambusa.
V. RELEVANCE OF MOLECULAR TAXONOMY
IN BAMBOO
Two major objectives of any taxonomic study are (a) systematic grouping of
the taxa of interest through generation of robust, natural classification system
based on stable characters that reflect their true evolutionary history and
(b) development of reliable identification key(s) for easy taxon determination.
Most of the classifications proposed to date for bamboo are primarily dependent on various morphological features and one of the most immediate needs
is to test how natural all these systems are. Stapleton (1997) has summarized
few important limitations associated with the traditional morphological classifications: (1) Morphology‐based classifications are often superficial as similarities have frequently gained priorities over dissimilarities. (2) Reproductive
characters have often earned priority with an assumption of having higher
evolutionary significance than the vegetative characters. The importance of
many vegetative features such as rhizome or branch patterns was understood
later and thus many of the early herbarium specimens were incomplete.
(3) In many cases artificiality was enhanced as characters were frequently
considered in isolation rather than considered in groups.
It is undeniable that vegetative features are quite essential for field identification of the woody members as flowering cycles are often erratic, which
severely restricts the opportunity to study fresh reproductive materials. Even
if the dried, herbarium samples are available, quite often these lack enough
morphological resolution and thus create confusion in the real field condition. Hence, the identification keys are mostly dependent on various vegetative features that need further refinement and re‐investigation. In particular,
the taxonomic demarcation of woody bamboos at lower ranks, such as
genera and species, are not well resolved to date. There are several species
which are known only vegetatively, new species are constantly been described
(Clark et al., 2007; Filgueiras and Londoño, 2006; Triplett et al., 2006) and
several undescribed taxa are known to occur in the wild habitat of South
and Central Americas.
240
M. DAS ET AL.
Molecular data sets can provide useful information for addressing various
aspects of plant taxonomy. Considerable progress has already been achieved
in bamboo and this chapter is primarily aimed at reviewing the various
molecular tools applied to date and also the potential pitfalls that need to
be critically considered. The major challenge associated with any molecular
method is to determine the appropriate taxonomic level at which it is most
informative and to correlate it with morphologically definable taxonomic
groupings.
VI. DNA FINGERPRINTING‐BASED METHODS
A. RFLP
In restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP), diVerences in the restriction enzyme recognition site sequences between genomes are the basis of
polymorphism. These markers are co‐dominant in nature and are useful for
marker assisted selection. The technique was introduced to bamboo by Friar
and Kochert (1991, 1994) for phylogeny assessment of 61 accessions and 20
species of Phyllostachys. The study supported the earlier observations of the
presence of two distinct sections (Phyllostachys and Heteroclada) in Phyllostachys species pool. However, they disagreed to place P. nigra under the section
Heteroclada and thus contradicted a previous study (Wang et al., 1980).
The regular use of RFLP in plant genotyping as well as bamboo has been
limited mainly due to the requirements of large amount of DNA along with
the use of radioactive isotopes.
B. RAPD
In randomly amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD, Williams et al., 1990)
technology, a single and short arbitrary primer is used. RAPD was utilized
to assess phylogenetic relationships among 73 genotypes of Phyllostachys
(Gielis et al., 1997b). The resultant phylogeny neither supported the existence
of two distinct sections in the Phyllostachys‐species‐complex nor the placement of P. nigra under Phyllostachys, hence deviated from the previous
proposal by Friar and Kochert (1994). However, based on a combined
application of RAPD and morphometry, it was confirmed that P. nigra
belongs to the section Phyllostachys (Ding, 1998) and it was also confirmed
by AFLP (Fig. 6A) and ITS sequence data (Fig. 6B) that two distinct sections,
Phyllostachys and Heteroclada, do exist in the Phyllostachys species pool. The
utility of RAPD was extended to the tropical group as well. B. ventricosa was
found close to B. vulgaris var. striata (Nayak and Das, 2003) and was supported by a previous finding that B. ventricosa is a cultivated variety of
B. vulgaris (Chua et al., 1996). Similarly, a high level genetic proximity
A
11
32
100
13
8
P. sulphurea
P. sulphurea
40
13
18
60
P. rubromarginata
57
P. mannii
45
P. lithophylla
9
12
12
37
14
9
P. arcana
12
P. aurea
39
100
Section
phyllostochys
P. angusta
25
P. glauca
13
P. fulva
17
P. flexuosa
34
19
100
67
5
9
P. incarnata
6
P. rubicunda
38
100
52
P. nuda
8
P. viridiglaucescens
12
P. bambusoides
33
26
93
100
27
?
P. dulcis
57
36
97
31
81
27
P. nigra
62
83
13
P. heteroclada
47
P. nidularia
Section
heteroclada
53
14
50
P. humilis
31
22
34
60
P. bissetii
P. aureosulcata
72
P. platyglossa
B
P. viridiglaucescens
1 P. bambusoides
54 1
1 P. flexuosa
1
P. glauca
5
P. platyglossa
33
100
P. dulcis
6
P. muda
89
3
8
P. fulva
87 2
P. arcana
3
81 2 P. aurea
10
7
96
24
99
6
8
58
6
84 5
2
Section
phyllostohys
P. heteroclada
P. bissetili
Section
heteroclads
Chimonobambusa marmorea
Shibataea chinensis
Sinobambusa tootsik
Neomicrocalamus andropogonifolius
Fig. 6. The existence of two separate sections, Phyllostachys and Heteroclada, was
confirmed by both (A) AFLP and (B) ITS sequence‐based phylogeny (Hodkinson
et al., 2000; reproduced with permission from The Botanical Society of Japan).
(0.91) was obtained between B. striata and B. vulgaris (Das et al., 2007) that
was in compliance with the proposition that B. striata is a somatic mutant of
B. vulgaris (Bennet and Gaur, 1990). RAPD‐based neighbour joining tree
242
M. DAS ET AL.
clearly separated the thorny core Bambusa group from the Dendrocalamus
group (Sun et al., 2006). However, most of these studies considered limited
number of species and hence the phylogenetic relationships need to be further
validated by applying wider species and genera range. Studies on population
variability are another area that could benefit from RAPD technology (Hsiao
and Rieseberg, 1994). It was found more eYcient than micro‐ or minisatellite
to assess genetic variations among the clones of P. pubescens in Taiwan (Lai
and Hsiao, 1997). Identification of only nine genotypes among a pool of 176
samples clearly suggested the existence of low population genetic variability.
Likewise, applying selected primers which were found highly polymorphic at
the rank of species (Das et al., 2007) could not detect any polymorphism
among 17 geographically isolated populations of B. tulda (Bhattacharya et al.,
2006). These two population level studies indicate the possible existence of
limited genetic variability that could be attributed to the pre‐dominant
vegetative mode of propagation in bamboo. Nevertheless, it is necessary to
emphasize that in spite of enormous promise, the reliability and reproducibility
of RAPD technique is not beyond doubt.
C. SCARS
Sequence characterized amplified regions (SCARs) is an extension of the
RAPD procedure (Paran and Michelmore, 1993), but with better reproducibility due to the use of higher annealing temperature. SCARs are
co‐dominant and have been proved useful for genotype/varietal identification. Particularly, they are useful at the seedling stage when key morphological features are indistinguishable. We have developed two species‐specific
SCAR markers for B. balcooa and B. tulda (Das et al., 2005) to aid the paper
and pulp industry for accurate species diagnosis. To authenticate the utility
of these markers at the population level, 80 individual plants collected from
16 eco‐geographically diverse populations were screened.
D. AFLP
Amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) is a method described as a
combination of RFLP‐ and PCR‐based techniques (Vos et al., 1995).
It generates dominant markers like RAPD and is highly sensitive to detect
polymorphisms among closely related genomes. It has already been demonstrated eYcient in measuring genetic relationships among 15 bamboo species
representing four diVerent genera (Loh et al., 2000). Unique banding patterns
were obtained in 13 out of 15 species and the cluster pattern helped reveal the
polyphyletic nature of the genus Bambusa. However, separation of two Dendrocalamus species in two diVerent clusters emphasized the need to re‐examine
BAMBOO TAXONOMY AND DIVERSITY
243
their status. This technique has also been employed to assess the genetic diversity of the woody American bamboos, namely, Guadua angustifolia, G. amplexifolia, G. macrospiculata, G. superba and G. unicata (Marulanda et al., 2002).
Distinct genetic diVerentiations were observed between species. At the accession level, higher genetic diversity was observed for G. amplexifolia, while it was
low for G. angustifolia. Study of clonal structure is an integral part of bamboo
biodiversity assessment and AFLP proved useful. A study on the population of
the dwarf bamboo, Sasa senanensis, revealed high clonal diversity (Suyama
et al., 2000). The clonal distribution pattern over a 10 ha study plot indicated a
possible relationship between the clone size and the site characteristics where
they grow. For example, larger clones were found in the flat areas, while smaller
sized clones were found in steep soil that might have interfered with proper
rhizome growth. Another population level study re‐confirmed 67 years of
flowering interval in P. pubescens and enumerated that a population originating
from the seeds of same flowering event may not necessarily have the same
flowering interval (Isagi et al., 2004). The temporal variations in flowering
cycles among the siblings of P. pubescens reflect heterogeneity among seeds
and are not unexpected in the perennial plant group.
AFLP has been proved useful in diverse aspects of bamboo systematics,
population structure and variability studies (Gielis et al., 2001) due to the
high sensitivity of the technique. However, few limitations associated with
the technique include high technical skill and diYculty in analysis of the large
number of amplified bands in addition to the cost and time involved.
E. MICROSATELLITES (SSRS)
Microsatellites or simple sequence repeats (SSRs, Litt and Lutty, 1989) are
short tandem repeated sequences of 1–6 nucleotides in length, highly polymorphic, co‐dominant, multi‐allelic, presumed selectively neutral and hence
widely used in plant genetic diversity studies. Primers are designed from the
conserved genomic regions flanking the repeat sequences and the detected
polymorphism reflects variation in the number of repeats among genomes.
However, the entire procedures that include construction and screening of
genomic library prior to primer designing are cumbersome and cost intensive. This severely limits the wide application of the technique in non‐crop
plants like bamboo, as suYcient genomic information is not yet available in
the database. In spite of that, they have already been successfully applied to
Phyllostachys (Lai and Hsiao, 1997) and Bambusa (Nayak and Rout, 2005).
Six microsatellites were isolated from B. arundinacea and their cross‐species
amplification was tested in 18 other bamboo species (Nayak and Rout, 2005).
This proof of the principle study indicates that informative conserved
244
M. DAS ET AL.
sequences across taxa could be successfully utilized for defining comparative
systematic strategies, and thus reduces the eVorts to develop microsatellites
for individual bamboo species.
F. EXPRESSED SEQUENCE TAG DERIVED MICROSATELLITES (EST‐SSR)
This is another chimeric marker technology, where SSRs are harvested
in silico from EST sequences. It has been shown that EST‐SSR markers
derived from maize, wheat, sorghum and rice could be successfully utilized
to evaluate genetic diversity among 92 temperate bamboo accessions (Barkley
et al., 2005). The technique proved sensitive enough to detect contamination
in a bamboo plot where Phyllostachys rubromarginata stands were mixed with
either P. flexuosa or P. glauca stands. Thus EST‐SSR holds the promise to
extrapolate genomic information from crop to non‐crop plants by exploiting
genetic collinearity among the members of the grass family. Although EST‐
SSRs are less polymorphic than genomic SSRs, their easy transferability
across species border‐line is highly desirable (Yu et al., 2004), particularly in
systems like bamboo where much genomic information is not yet available.
G. TRANSPOSON
Miniature inverted‐repeat transposable elements (MITEs) are an important
member of the transposon family with high abundance in plants (Wessler
et al., 1995). MITE‐transposon display (MITE‐TD) is a modification of the
AFLP technique, where the conserved sequence stretches of the MITE
transposons are targeted. It has been successfully recruited to assess genetic
variations among Oryza species (Park et al., 2003). Sensitivity of another
transposon family member, Rim2/Hipa‐TD, has been tested positive to
clearly diVerentiate japonica and indica ecotypes of rice (Kwon et al., 2005).
Retro‐elements like Wis‐2 have been found conserved across grass genomes
like wheat, barley, rye, oats and Aegilops and transcriptionally more active in
grasses than in dicots (Vicient et al., 2001). The presence of Ac‐like sequences
was found in Bambusa multiplex (Huttley et al., 1995), while partial Ac‐like
transposon elements were isolated from three bamboo species: Bambusa
vulgaris, Sasa veitchii and Phyllostachys edulis (Gielis, 1998). The sequence
obtained from B. vulgaris revealed considerable homology to the hAT superfamily of transposons (Keukeleire et al., 2004). A recent study indicates that
23.28% of P. pubescens genome is enriched with repeat elements and majority
of them (18.89%) were LTR retro‐transposons, mainly Gypsy/DIRS1 and
Ty1/Copia type (Jie et al., 2007). The possible link between transposons and
BAMBOO TAXONOMY AND DIVERSITY
245
flowering event in bamboo has been speculated over the years, although no
direct evidence has yet been obtained.
VII. DNA SEQUENCE‐BASED METHODS
A. ORGANELLAR GENES
In the early era of plant molecular systematics, chloroplast DNA restriction site
polymorphism was extensively utilized to discriminate plant taxa (Olmstead
and Palmer, 1994, for detailed account) and grasses were no exception. In one
such study, the phylogenetic relationships among 31 grass taxa selected from six
diVerent subfamilies were evaluated (Davis and Soreng, 1993). The analysis
identified two main clades, one was the Pooideae and the other clade was
PACC that included the woody Bambusoideae (Fig. 7A). This PACC clade
A
Joinvillea
*PACC clade
Lithachne
*Bambuseae
Pharus
Nardus
Brachyelytrum
*Oryzeae
*Pooideae,
incl. Diarrhena
• Two major groups in grasses are PACC (Panicoideae,
Arundinoideae, Chloridoideae and Centothecoideae) and
Pooideae; Davis and Soreng (1993) based on chloroplast
restriction polymporphism
Fig. 7.
(Continued )
B
Oryza sativa
Oryzeae
Leersia virginica
Ehrharta calycina
Ehrharteae
Streptogyna americana
Streptogyneae
Arundinaria gigantea
Chimonobambusa marmorea Bambuseae
Phyllostachys pubescens
Olyra latifolia
Lithachne humilis
Olyreae
Lithachne pauciflora
Raddia distichophylla
Bambusa stenostachya
Bambusa aff. bambos
Cephalostachyum pergracile
Bambuseae
Chusquea latifolia
Chusquea circinata
Guadua paniculata
Oryzopsis racemosa
Stipeae
Poa pratensis
Poeae
Avena sativa
Aveneae
Hordeum vulgare
Triticeae
Diarrhena obovata
Diarrheneae
Phaenosperma globosum
Phaenospermateae
Brachyelytrum erectum
Brachyelyteae
Danthoniopsis petiolata
Arundinelleae
Thysanolaena maxima
Thysanolaeneae
Zeugites pittieri
Chasmanthium laxum
Centotheceae
Setaria viridis
Paniceae
Panicum virgatum
Sorghum bicolor
Andropogoneae
Zea mays
Molinia caerulea
Phragmites australis
Arundineae
Arundo donax
Micraira lazaridisii
Micraireae
Zoysia matrella
Zoysieae
Sporobolus indicus
Eragrostideae
Eustachys petraea
Chlorideae
Eragrostis curvula
Eragrostideae
Aristida longiseta
Pharus latifolius
Aristideae
Phareae
Pharus lappulaceus
Streptochaeta angustifolia
Streptochaeteae
Anomochloa marantoidea
Anomochloeae
Joinvillea ascendens
Joinvilleaceae
Flagellaria indica
Flagellariaceae
• Anomochloeae, Streptochaeteae and Phareae are basal lineages
• strong support for PACC and weak support for BOP
• core Bambusoideae (Olyreae and Bambuseae) momophyletic; Clark et al.,
1995 based on ndhF data
Fig. 7.
(Continued )
C
100
49
100
81
37
3
b
100
3
74
1
91
1
94
6
j
86
2
88
4
95
5
84
3
100
28
98
5
100
13
62
2
1
2
86
4
89
4
97
5
1
1
100
10
1
100
10
100
13
95
4
100
14
93
4
88
3
90
2
Panicoideae
58
1
100
15
Centothecoideae
74
1
Chloridoideae
63
2
Aristida ads
Aristida lat
Arundo
Molinia
Phragmites
Danthonia
Centropodia
Bouteloua
Orcuttia
98
Chloris
Microchloa
7
Astrebla
Kengia
Aeluropus
1
Monodia
Zoysia
Sporobolus
100
Eragrostis
13
Pappophorum
Uniola
Chasmanthium
100
Lophalherum
Orthoclada
7
Zeugites
93
Andropogon
Hyparrhenia
3
h
Sorghum
h
Tristachya
Zea
Digitaria
89
Echinochloa
Panicum
2
Loudetiopsis
Arundinoideae
100
26
Oryzoideae
100
8
100
20
100
10
1
100
11
Bambusoideae
98
7
Pooideae
100
12 73
1
94
11
100
4
84
12
2
100
13 95
96
5
4
c
78
RESTIO
JOINVLLEA
Streptochaeta ang
Streptochaeta spi
Anomochloa
Pharus
Brachyelytrum
Nardus
Avena
Phalaris
Briza
Phleum
Poa
Vulpia
Bromus
Hordeum
Leymus
Triticum
Brachypodium
Melica
Nassella
Stipa
Lithachne
Olyra
Pariana
Chusquea
Phyllostachys
Sasa
Oryza
Zizania
Ehrharta
• Bambusoideae is close to Pooideae, Hilu et al., 1999 based on matK data
Fig. 7. The gradual progress of our current understanding of bamboo molecular
phylogeny based on (A) chloroplast DNA restriction site polymorphism (Davis
and Soreng, 1993, with permission to reproduce from American Journal of Botany),
248
M. DAS ET AL.
(Panicoideae, Arundinoideae, Chloridoideae and Centothecoideae) was subsequently supported by others (Barker et al., 1995; Cummings et al., 1994). With
the inclusion of DNA sequencing technology, employing coding sequences
became a regular practice. The transcribed sequences of five 18S and three
26S rRNA were studied from nine grass species those were members of Bambusoideae, Pooideae and Panicoideae (Hamby and Zimmer, 1988). The study
revealed Arundinaria as the basal lineage of the grasses. Chloroplast gene
sequencing gained acceleration with the introduction of the rbcL gene encoding
the large subunit of ribulose 1,5 bisphosphate carboxylase/oxygenase. Barker
et al. (1995) on the basis of the rbcL data revealed monophyletic Bambusoideae
related to Pooideae and PACC clade, while another study obtained a weakly
supported basal position for Bambusoideae (Duvall and Morton, 1996). However, the utility of rbcL sequences is often restricted above family level and not
suYcient for sub‐familial resolutions in grasses (Doebly et al., 1990). In particular, the longer generation time of the woody bamboos might cause slower
nucleotide substitution rate compared to other grasses (Gaut et al., 1997) and
thus less preferable for lower taxonomic groups. Search for additional informative genes continued and new chloroplast genes encoding ribosomal protein
S4 (rps4), NADH‐plastoquinone oxidoreductase subunit 5 (ndhF), maturase K
(matK) and RNA polymerase subunit (rpoC2) have emerged. The rps4 was
targeted to analyze 26 genera of grasses that included three woody bamboos
(Nadot et al., 1994). Their analyses showed paraphyly for the bambusoid
group that was close to oryzoids and pooids. It was subsequently supported
by the rbcL (Barker et al., 1995) and matK (Liang and Hilu, 1996) sequence
data.
The first extensive eVort utilizing a wide sample of Bambusoid relied on
the ndhF gene due to its higher evolution rate than rbcL (Clark et al., 1995).
The analyses based on 45 grass sequences resolved the three herbaceous
bamboo tribes, Anomochloeae, Streptochaeteae and Phareae, as the basal
lineage within the grass family (Fig. 7B). All the other members of Bambusoideae were clearly separated out. One of the two major clades was a weakly
supported BOP clade (Bambusoids, Oryzoids and Pooids), while a strong
support was obtained for the PACC clade. Monophyly for the core Bambusoid group (Olyreae and Bambuseae) was observed. It was also inferred that
many features that are authentic to traditional Bambusoideae are possible
synapomorphies for the family. The ndhF sequence data has also
been utilized to confirm polyphyly for Apoclada (Guala et al., 2000).
(B) ndhF sequence data (Clark et al., 1995, with permission to reproduce from
the American Society of Taxonomy) and (C) matK sequence data (Hilu et al., 1999,
with permission to reproduce from the Missouri Botanical Garden Press).
BAMBOO TAXONOMY AND DIVERSITY
249
A consequence of this study was the description of a new genus (Filgueirasia)
that was nested inside Apoclada S.L. (Guala, 2003). Nonetheless, the earliest
divergence of Streptochaeta and Anomochloa followed by Pharus was subsequently supported by matK sequence analysis from 62 grass species covering
9 sub‐families (Hilu et al., 1999). Bambusoideae was placed in a separate
clade with Pooideae (Fig. 7C). By this time Clark and Judziewicz (1996)
recognized that monophyly for Bambusoideae could not be retained if the
basal lineages, that is Anomochlooideae and Pharoideae, were to be accommodated. Another chloroplast gene rpo C2 was found useful for grass
phylogeny assessment for possessing an extra coding sequence that enhances
the rate of substitution and insertion/deletion events (Cummings et al., 1994).
DNA sequence data from the non‐coding regions of chloroplasts were
simultaneously exploited, particularly for the lower taxonomic categories
with the assumption that non‐coding regions are under reduced functional
constrain than are coding regions and thus exhibit higher level of sequence
variations for enhanced phylogenetic resolutions (Gielly and Taberlet, 1994).
The rpl 16 intron data was successfully utilized to study relationships among
23 species of Chusquea and 15 taxa from Bambusoideae (Kelchner and Clark,
1997). Monophyly for Chusquea was strongly supported as was also recognized for the herbaceous and woody bamboos within Bambusoideae. The
woody bamboo was divided into temperate and tropical bamboos and the
tropical group was further subdivided into New World and Old World clades.
Zhang (2000) has demonstrated the successful utilization of rpl 16 sequences
even for higher taxonomic level. His analysis based on 35 sequences from six
major sub‐families supported the existence of two major, monophyletic
groups, BOP and PACC, within the grass family. Although Oryzoideae and
Pooideae were strongly supported as monophyletic, support for Bambusoideae was weak. The basal lineage of Streptochaeteae, Anomochloeae and
Phareae was also supported. An in‐depth study of the clade Arthrostylidiinae
and Guaduinae employing about 50 woody species from Brazil based on the
rpl 16 intron as well as trnD‐T and trnT‐L sequences is currently under way by
Santos‐Gonçalves (personal communication by T.S.F.).
Various chloroplast sequences have contributed immensely to our current
understanding of grass as well as bamboo systematics. Particularly at deeper
levels, the relative ease of the plastid DNA sequencing makes it a powerful
tool for phylogenetic reconstructions. However, several events such as
recombination, heteroplasmy or haplotype polymorphism can confound
these attempts (Wolfe and Randle, 2004, for detailed account) and hence
plastid sequence data should always be combined with other sequences to
achieve suYcient resolution for a robust phylogeny.
250
M. DAS ET AL.
B. NUCLEAR GENES
Among the nuclear genes, internal transcribed spacers of 18S‐5.8S‐26S
nuclear ribosomal cistron have gained rapid popularity for plant phylogenetic inference. The ITS regions, 500–700 bp long in angiosperms (Baldwin
et al., 1995), are flanked by highly conserved sequence stretches and thus
amplified by universal primers (White et al., 1990) and sequenced. Taxon‐
specific character‐state changes in the ITS regions are an outcome of
concerted evolution and hence insertion‐deletion polymorphisms (indels)
are targeted for phylogenetic reexamination (Alvarez and Wendel, 2003).
Phylogenetic relationships among the members of Thamnocalamus and
allied groups have been extensively studied with ITS sequence data. Monophyly for the Thamnocalamus group was revealed (Guo et al., 2002). It was
subsequently supported by combined as well as individual application of the
ITS and low copy granule bound starch synthase gene (GBSSI) sequence
data (Guo and Li, 2004). However, the tree based on the combined data sets
(GBSSI and ITS) had higher resolution than that based on individual data
set. ITS sequence was also employed to study genetic variation and phylogeny assessment of 23 alpine bamboo species from three genera, Thamnocalamus, Fargesia and Yushania. It identified T. spathiflorus var. crassinodus and
F. spathacea as the basal lineage of alpine bamboos, although the bootstrap
support was weak (Guo et al., 2001). However, it did not observe monophyly
for Fargesia and Yushania and suggested the need to re‐investigate the
delimiting morphological features. Sequence (ITS) and PCR markers
(AFLP) were simultaneously applied to re‐examine the phylogenetic relationships of Phyllostachys complex (Hodkinson et al., 2000). Monophyletic
origin and existence of two distinct sections within the Phyllostachys species
pool were supported (Fig. 6A and B). Heteroclada was further sub‐divided
into two groups and another group within the section Phyllostachys was
strongly advocated. The application of ITS sequence data was also extended
beyond temperate bamboos. In one such study encompassing 21 species of
Bambusa, Denrocalamus, Dendrocalamopsis, Guadua, Leleba and Lingnania,
the members of Dendrocalamus were shown as close relatives of Bambusa
(Sun et al., 2005). In another study, monophyly of Olyreae and Raddia was
strongly supported by either single or combined use of ITS and trnD‐T
sequence data (Oliveira, 2006). The basal position of Streptochaeta and
Pharus, as already established by various chloroplast genes, has also been
supported by ITS data, although Anomochloa was not included in this study
(Hsiao et al., 1998). A search (as of October, 2007) in the NCBI‐nucleotide
database (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov) revealed that complete or partial sequence
information is already available for 123 bamboo species spanning across 36
BAMBOO TAXONOMY AND DIVERSITY
251
genera that reflects a wide acceptability of ITS sequence data to a broad
section of bamboo taxonomists. Although nuclear markers were mostly
dominated by spacer sequences, the use of low‐copy nuclear genes is gaining
popularity. For instance, Mathews et al. (2000) on the basis of the analysis of
51 PHYB sequences concluded Anomochloa and Streptochaeta as the first
lineage of the grass family, followed by Pharus and Puelia. This is in gross
agreements with many early reports based on various chloroplast regions.
However, one of the most significant enhancements was to obtain a strong
support for the BOP clade that was previously weakly supported by the ndhF
data (Clark et al., 1995) and was not supported at all by other plastid
sequences (Cummings et al., 1994; Davis and Soreng, 1993; Nadot et al.,
1994). A high support for this clade had also been obtained by the combined
application of three phytochrome loci (Mathews and Sharrock, 1996).
Nonetheless, bi‐parental, nuclear ITS regions are one of the most popular
choices for phylogenetic inference at genus level or below due to higher rate
of base substitution than most of the organellar genes. In addition their high
copy numbers allow easy amplification by targeting the conserved priming
sites surrounding 18S and 26S regions. However, there are associated molecular events that could always confound phylogenetic inference (Alvarez and
Wendel, 2003) in addition to the limitation due to small number of informative features (Baldwin et al., 1995) and frequent diYculty in alignment due to
length variations (Hsiao et al., 1998). One of the most important prerequisites is to target the true orthologous sequences in related taxa that are
subjected to phylogenetic re‐investigation. However, in absence of complete
homogenization, unintended inclusion of paralogous counterpart is possible
and can always delude the eVort. Particularly, such chances are very high in
woody bamboos where extensive genome polyploidization is a common
occurrence. The other confounding phenomena discussed by Alvarez and
Wendel (2003) are existence of large number of rDNA arrays, eVect of
secondary structure on base substitution and chances of contamination due
to the use of universal primers. Of these, the contamination problem has
already been experienced in the woody bamboo where fungal rDNA was
inadvertently co‐isolated and hence co‐amplified with the target DNA
(Zhang et al., 1997). Epiphyllous fungi are frequently associated with bamboo leaves. Hence fresh leaves should always be suYciently surface sterilized
prior to DNA extraction and to avoid any possible contamination. It is also
preferable not to rely on a single PCR reaction, but to clone and sequence
products amplified under various reaction conditions (Alvarez and Wendel,
2003) to avoid PCR bias or drift (Wagner et al., 1994). However, many of
these issues could be equally associated with any rapidly evolving region that
is essential for lower taxonomic or recently radiated groups. The use of low
252
M. DAS ET AL.
copy, nuclear genes is gaining quick popularity as it combines the benefit of
high substitution rate but lower chances of obtaining the paralogous counterparts (Small et al., 1998). However, their extensive utilization is mainly
restricted by experimental diYculties in isolation and characterization due
to lack of suYcient sequence information available in the database.
VIII. SUMMARY AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS
A. MORPHOLOGICAL SYSTEMATICS AND IDENTIFICATION
Generation of enormous morphological and anatomical data over the years
has built up a strong foundation for bamboo taxonomy studies to address
both systematic and identification issues. However, one should always keep
this in mind that vegetative morphology‐only phylogenetic analyses often
lack suYcient resolution and thus should always be compared with the
outcome from other data sources. In an attempt to evaluate phylogenetic
relationships among 15 tropical woody species, we obtained the dendrogram
pattern based on 32 morphological descriptors that was not fully supported
by the classification system of Gamble, while the cluster pattern computed
from 120 polymorphic RAPD fragments was in gross agreement (Das et al.,
2007). Our follow‐up study based on higher number of taxa (25) revealed
similar discrepancy between morphological (Fig. 8A) and DNA polymorphism (Fig. 8B)‐based dendrograms, while only the latter was in complete
agreement with the classification system. It is surprising since most of the
selected culm (Table I) and culm‐sheath characters (Table II) used in this
study are widely used for bamboo species characterization. The most probable explanation is that the classification system was developed using vegetative plus reproductive characters, while only vegetative characters were
analyzed in the present study due to the unavailability of reproductive
organs. This case study clearly shows that chances of potential errors exist
for any phylogenetic interpretation in bamboo that is not based on a complete array of morphological features, that is vegetative plus reproductive.
Nonetheless, morphology‐based identification keys are very useful for quick
identification at the field, yet it needs further precision as morphological
features are often influenced by environment due to the event of true parallelism
(Kellogg and Watson, 1993). Particularly, the population level understanding
of morphological variability needs to be enhanced in bamboo. We have identified a number of morphological variations in diVerent Bambusa species that call
for serious attention to reevaluate the identification keys applied in the field.
For instance, in few cases striated culms were observed in B. tulda, which
resembles that of B. striata (Fig. 9A and B), while bent culms and compressed,
253
BAMBOO TAXONOMY AND DIVERSITY
A
0.77
A. malig
T. spathiflorus subsp.spathiflorus
B. burmanica
B. oliveriana
B. multiplex ‘Rivieriorum’
B. multiplex ‘Variagata’
B. striata
B. vulgaris
B. wamin
D. strictus
B. atra
M. baccifera
B. affinis
O. abyssinica
D. giganteus
G. atroviolacea
P. kurzii
B. balcooa
B. anriculata
B. nutans
B. tulda
B. teres
B. polymorpha
B. bambos
B. bambos var.giganteus
0.54
0.41
0.28
0.16
Distance coefficient
B
A. maling
T. spathiflorus subsp. spathiflorus
M. baccifera
O. abyssinica
D. giganteus
G. atroviolacea
D. strictus
P. kurzii
B. affinis
B. atra
B. auriculata
B. teres
B. tulda
B. nutans
B. burmanica
B. striata
B. vulgaris
B. wamin
B. balcooa
B. bambos
B. bambos var. giganteus
B. oliveriana
B. multiplex ‘Rivieriorum’
B. multiplex ‘Variagata’
B. polymorpha
0.00
0.22
0.45
Genetic distance coefficient
0.67
0.90
Fig. 8. Dendogram derived from UPGMA cluster analysis based on (A) 32 key
morphological characters and (B) 244 polymorphic RAPD fragments of 25 woody
bamboo species.
swollen internodes were recorded for B. balcooa and B. tulda (Fig. 9C and D).
Therefore, further investigations covering diverse ecosystems and taxa are
essential to confirm a set of morphological features stable across ecotypes.
TABLE I
A Comparison of the 15 Key Culm Descriptors Used to Evaluate Phylogenetic Relationships Among 25 Bamboo Species (OTUs): Mean Height (m), Diameter (mm),
Length of Fifth Internode (mm), Ratio of Cavity Diameter to Total Culm Diameter, Internode Bending, Colour (Yellow with Striation ¼ 0, Yellow‐Green ¼ 1, Gray‐Green ¼ 2, Pale Green ¼ 3,
Bright Green ¼ 4, Glossy Green ¼ 5, Dark Green ¼ 6), Swollen Node, Nodal Ring (Absent ¼ 0, Whitish ¼ 1, Grayish ¼ 2), Nodal Sheath Scar, Hairs at Nodal Ring, Branches Come Out Piercing
Culm Sheath, Curved Lower Nodal Branches, DiVerent Culm Leaf and Branch Leaf Size, Modification of Branches (None ¼ 0, Thorns ¼ 1, Spines ¼ 2), Striation on Culm
OTUs
Heighta
Diametera
Internodea
Cavitya
Bendingb
Colour
Swollen
nodeb
Nodal
ring
Sheath
scarb
Hairsb
Branchingb
Curved
branchesb
Leaf
sizeb
Modifications
Striationb
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
4.2 0.8
6.5 0.9
7.0 1.0
18.3 2.7
20.0 2.9
25.0 5.0
15.8 2.5
15.5 2.2
3.0 0.7
2.5 0.05
12.5 3.2
14.0 1.5
20.2 3.2
16.5 0.9
15.5 3.2
18.3 3.2
19.8 2.2
7.0 1.0
30.5 3.2
14.0 2.7
21.0 2.8
15.0 1.2
8.0 1.3
9.14 1.8
5.0 1.5
50 2.0
40.0 6.0
35.0 5.2
45.0 6.7
90.0 13.5
110 20.0
55.0 8.8
70.0 5.5
20.0 4.6
15.0 3.6
60.0 8.7
37.5 4.1
100 8.7
70.0 9.4
70.0 8.7
50.0 8.7
80.0 8.9
120 17.0
130 13.4
50 9.5
60 8.0
55 5.0
80 5.0
35 7.0
15 5.0
110 15
500 75.0
600 90.0
400 60.0
200 30.0
300 10.0
230 36.6
300 30.5
200 45.8
180 45.8
400 65.8
350 38.4
500 65.8
190 18.6
500 65.8
380 65.8
230 25.5
120 18.6
330 34.2
200 71.4
375 26.4
220 15.0
180 15.0
220 43.9
120 20.0
0.33 0.05
0.37 0.06
0.42 0.06
0.22 0.03
0.33 0.05
0.45 0.05
0.36 0.06
0.52 0.05
0.12 0.03
0.12 0.03
0.4 0.07
0.53 0.06
0.45 0.07
0.42 0.06
0.48 0.07
0.4 0.07
0.5 0.06
0.33 0.05
0.69 0.07
0.6 0.11
0.54 0.07
0.32 0.05
0.55 0.06
0.5 0.09
0.33 0.05
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
2
6
3
4
2
2
5
3
3
4
5
1
0
6
6
4
6
2
1
6
4
4
2
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
2
1
0
0
1
2
2
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
2
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
OTU 1 ¼ Arundinaria maling, 2 ¼ Bambusa aYnis, 3 ¼ B. atra, 4 ¼ B. auriculata, 5 ¼ B. balcooa, 6 ¼ B. bambos var. giganteus, 7 ¼ B. bambos, 8 ¼ B. burmanica, 9 ¼ B. multiplex ‘riviereorum’, 10 ¼ B. multiplex ‘variagata’, 11 ¼ B.
nutans, 12 ¼ B. oliveriana, 13 ¼ B. polymorpha, 14 ¼ B. striata, 15 ¼ B. teres, 16 ¼ B. tulda, 17 ¼ B. vulgaris, 18 ¼ B. wamin, 19 ¼ Dendrocalamus giganteus, 20 ¼ D. strictus, 21 ¼ Gigantochloa atroviolacea, 22 ¼ Melocanna baccifera,
23 ¼ Oxytenanthera abyssinica, 24 ¼ Pseudobambusa kurzii, 25 ¼ Thamnocalamus spathiflorus subsp. spathiflorus.
a
b
Mean SE.
Absent ¼ 0, present ¼ 1.
TABLE II
A Comparative Account of the 17 Key Culm‐Sheath Descriptors Used to Evaluate Phylogenetic Relationships Among 25 Bamboo Species (OTUs): Ratio of Total Length to Breadth at Base,
Ciliate Margin, Pubescent Adaxial Side, Pubescent Abaxial Side, Hair Colour (None ¼ 0, Golden Brown ¼ 1, Brown ¼ 2, Dark Brown ¼ 3, Black ¼ 4), Number of Hairs (Absent ¼ 0, Scanty ¼ 1, Profuse ¼ 2),
Ratio of Total Length versus Blade Length, Shape of Blade (Triangular ¼ 0, Acuminate ¼ 1, Lanceolate ¼ 2, Ovate ¼ 3), Blade Reflexed, Hairy Margin of Blade, Ligule Margin (Entire ¼ 0, Dentate ¼ 1,
Serrate ¼ 2), Hairs on Ligule, Auricle, Auricle Continuous with Blade, Bristles on Auricle, Auricle Fringed, Variable Culm Sheath Size at DiVerent Culm Height
OTUs
Length/Breadtha
Marginb
Pub.
adaxb
Pub.
abaxb
Hair
colour
Hair
number
Total/Bladea
Shape
Blade
reflexedb
Hairy
marginb
Ligule
margin
Hairs
on liguleb
Auricleb
Auricle
cont.b
Bristlesb
Auricle
fringedb
Sheath
sizeb
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
3.0 0.85
1.55 0.23
3.33 0.49
1.5 0.22
1.59 0.24
2.8 0.37
2.92 0.47
2.60 0.30
2.87 0.66
2.75 0.55
1.15 0.18
2.69 0.30
1.20 0.18
1.78 0.22
1.25 0.18
1.04 0.18
1.65 0.15
0.87 0.13
1.3 0.13
1.39 0.26
1.31 0.17
1.16 0.15
2.1 0.25
3.37 0.67
3.6 0.85
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
4
1
4
4
4
4
4
0
0
4
4
4
3
4
4
3
2
2
1
1
1
3
4
0
0
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
0
0
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
2
0
4.2 0.55
4.43 0.66
2.0 0.29
2.45 0.37
4.15 0.64
3.66 0.62
3.88 0.62
2.43 0.26
2.87 0.56
2.77 0.55
3.42 0.64
2.33 0.26
3.50 0.64
2.5 0.31
3.20 0.64
3.67 0.64
2.75 0.30
2.08 0.31
3.36 0.35
3.85 0.73
3.0 0.39
1.25 0.42
1.55 0.22
1.8 0.36
3.6 0.55
1
3
3
3
0
1
1
1
2
2
3
1
3
3
3
3
1
3
2
0
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
1
1
2
0
0
1
2
1
1
2
0
0
2
2
2
2
2
2
0
2
2
2
0
1
0
1
2
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
1
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
OTU 1 ¼ Arundinaria maling, 2 ¼ Bambusa aYnis, 3 ¼ B. atra, 4 ¼ B. auriculata, 5 ¼ B. balcooa, 6 ¼ B. bambos var. giganteus, 7 ¼ B. bambos, 8 ¼ B. burmanica, 9 ¼ B. multiplex ‘riviereorum’, 10 ¼ B. multiplex
‘variagata’, 11 ¼ B. nutans, 12 ¼ B. oliveriana, 13 ¼ B. polymorpha, 14 ¼ B. striata, 15 ¼ B. teres, 16 ¼ B. tulda, 17 ¼ B. vulgaris, 18 ¼ B. wamin, 19 ¼ Dendrocalamus giganteus, 20 ¼ D. strictus, 21 ¼ Gigantochloa
atroviolacea, 22 ¼ Melocanna baccifera, 23 ¼ Oxytenanthera abyssinica, 24 ¼ Pseudobambusa kurzii, 25 ¼ Thamnocalamus spathiflorus subsp. spathiflorus.
a
b
Mean SE.
Absent ¼ 0, present ¼ 1.
256
M. DAS ET AL.
Fig. 9. Striations on the culm of (A) Bambsa striata and (B) B. tulda; bent culm
with compressed internodes in (C) B. tulda and (D) B. balcooa.
B. MOLECULAR SYSTEMATICS AND IDENTIFICATION
Applications of the various molecular tools have enormous potential, but
need judicial application based on the objectivity of the study and taxonomic
rank under consideration. Utility of the sequence‐based molecular markers
over PCR‐based markers for phylogenetic reconstructions is now well
established. However, considerable disagreements still exist regarding the
number(s) and nature (gene vs. spacer, or organellar gene vs. nuclear gene)
of the target sequence(s). It is quite apparent that identifying one universal
barcode, like that of mitochondrial CO1 in animals, is a distant hope for
plant taxa (Pennisi, 2007). The slow evolution rate of the mitochondrial
genes and low copy number of the nuclear genes led the plant taxonomists
to focus mainly on various chloroplastic regions in recent years. Five candidate genes (rbcL, matK, rpoC1, rpoB, atpF/H) and two spacers (trnH‐psbA,
psbK/I) are in the centre of all interests (Pennisi, 2007). Also a consensus has
been developed to use a combination of these target sequences to avoid the
inherent problems associated with each one of them. Similar consensus needs
BAMBOO TAXONOMY AND DIVERSITY
257
720
700
680
660
640
620
600
580
560
au
ric
B. ula
ba ta
B. lc
B. b a o o a
be mb
ec oo
s
h
B. ey
bl an
um a
B . e an
a
c
B. h u
co ng
i
n
B.
t i
em ract
ei a
B. en
fle sis
x
B uo
B. . g sa
ha ran
d
in
B an is
B. . in en
m ter sis
em m
br edia
a
B. na
m cea
ul
ti
B. ple
n x
B. uta
B. old ns
po ha
B. lym mii
si or p
n
B. o s h a
su pin
ba os
eq a
B. ua
su lis
rre
B. cta
te
xt
i
B lis
B. . t u
tu lda
ld
oi
d
B. es
v
B. ali
vu da
lg
ar
is
540
B.
Complete nucleotide sequences length (ITS1,5.8S rRNA, ITS2)
to be developed among the bamboo taxonomists to decide suitable target
regions that could be universally sequenced, but should reveal enough sequence diversity to diVerentiate closely related taxa and lower ranks. In
parallel the high copy, bi‐parental, ITS regions could be exploited since
sequence data are publicly available for many species. However, one of the
major limitations of bamboo ITS sequences is their considerable length
variation that constrain multiple alignment and phylogenetic tree development. We found that in Bambusa the length varied from 599 bp to 707 bp
(Fig. 10). Even for the same species (B. bambos, B. chungii, B. intermedia, B.
membranacea, B. sinospinosa, B. surrecta), considerable length variation was
observed across diVerent groups [represented by bar lines showing standard
deviation (SD) in Fig. 6]. It is not clear at this stage whether this is due to
diVerential evolution rate that generates this infra‐species heterogeneity. In
addition we also propose to set a stringent standard for ITS‐based phylogeny
development, similar to MIAME used for gene expression studies, to enhance
resolution and reproducibility.
Another practical challenge for bamboo molecular taxonomy is to provide
tools for rapid and accurate taxon determination. Particularly, species level
questions are always critical for the woody group and development of
specific DNA tags might be useful for commercial purposes. For instance,
bamboo constitute a major non‐wood fibre source for the paper and pulp
Fig. 10. Considerable length variations of spacers and 5.8S rRNA sequences
among the members of Bambusa based on the data retrieved from www.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov as of October 2007. Where more than one submission was found for the same
species, the mean value was used as the representative and SD represents variations.
258
M. DAS ET AL.
production in India and only 12 species have been identified for their suitability based on certain physical and chemical properties (Ganapathy, 1997).
One such candidate is Bambusa balcooa, which was preferred by the pulp
and paper industries because of its mechanical strength attributable to the
high specific gravity (Bhatt et al., 2003). Our identified strategy of developing
species‐specific SCAR‐marker (Das et al., 2005) is quite eVective to identify
species, even at the seedling stage when traditional morphological characters
often lack enough resolution.
C. FUTURE SCOPE OF COMPARATIVE GENOMICS
One of the potentially emerging areas for bamboo biology is the comparative
genomic studies, wherein available genomic information of other well‐
characterized cereal crops could be extrapolated to initiate functional genomics in bamboo. In this respect, Arabidopsis would certainly not be a good
choice since extensive genome duplications in bamboo, at least for the woody
group, might hinder the possibility of obtaining true one‐to‐one orthologs.
However, in absence of suYcient genomic information, a reasonable starting
point would be to target the collinear regions of the well‐characterized grass
genomes and to search for their homologous regions in bamboos. Based on
similar principle, EST‐SSR markers derived from maize, wheat, sorghum and
rice have already been applied to bamboo (Barkley et al., 2005). The scope of
the comparative genomics research in bamboo exists beyond taxonomy. One
of the intriguing questions for future is to study the genes and mechanisms
that control the unique flowering behaviour in bamboo. In particular floral
genes, such as FEA2, BA1/LAX1, FUL, IDS1, KN1 or RCN1/2 that have
already been characterized and connected to phenotypes in other grasses
(Malcomber et al., 2006, for further details), should be targeted. It is possible
to identify their homologous counterparts in bamboo by utilizing the conserved regions and subsequent functional characterization by expressing
those genes in rice or maize deletion mutant lines. It would also provide
some fundamental knowledge on the level of orthology existing between
bamboo and other domesticated grass genomes. Another important area
for future research is to characterize the genes regulating unique flowering
event and/or long vegetative phase in bamboo. This could be achieved by
performing suppression subtractive hybridization analysis where RNA from
a flowering clone could be used as a tester and a non‐flowering clone as a
driver or vice versa. The diVerentially expressed genes could be partially
sequenced to generate ESTs and predicted by sequence alignment with available grass ESTs. A similar approach has recently been undertaken to identify
the nuclear‐encoded non‐photosynthesis related genes in an albino mutant of
BAMBOO TAXONOMY AND DIVERSITY
259
Bambusa edulis (Lin et al., 2006). However, such eVorts are very scanty and
the absence of genetic map(s) or mapping population is quite apparent.
An NCBI search for bamboo revealed only 329 (mostly Bambusa oldhamii)
and 998 (mostly Phyllostachys edulis) hits against publicly available EST and
GSS collections. In addition databases that provide resources for diVerent
bamboo genotypes are also essential since without morphological connections it is always hard to characterize a set of genes. We have summarized a list
of web‐sites which are available so far and contain useful information regarding various aspects of bamboo biology (Table III).
D. GENETIC DIVERSITY AND ECOLOGY
In contrast to the vast majority of studies done to date on bamboo taxonomy
and systematics, investigations on genetic diversity at the population level are
in its infancy. Substantial work has been done to develop comprehensive
maps that describe the richness and distribution of woody bamboo species in
Asia Pacific, Africa, Madagascar and in America (Bystriakova et al., 2003a,b;
http://www.ourplanet.com/wcmc, index 14 and 19). The most alarming fact is
the finding that 400 species are potentially threatened by destruction of
natural forest cover in the Asia Pacific region. Studying distribution patterns
is an important component of bamboo biodiversity, while estimation of
population genetic diversity is equally essential for designing eVective conservation strategies. Multi‐loci PCR markers such as RAPD or AFLP are useful
at the population level due to relatively low cost, fast assay time and their
ability to depict polymorphism among closely related genomes. Our studies
on B. tulda (Bhattacharya et al., 2006) and Thamnocalamus spathiflorus
TABLE III
Important Web‐Resources for Bamboo Biologists
Web‐resource
Information available
http://www.eeob.iastate.edu/research/
bamboo/index.html
http://bamboo-identification.co.uk
Distribution maps, key characters,
methods, useful literatures
Description of important identifying
keys, classification, nomenclature,
useful literatures
General bamboo information
Plantations, tissue culture, bio‐energy
Evaluation data on bamboo
accessions
Sustainable social, economic and
environmental benefits of bamboo
http://www.americanbamboo.org/
http://www.oprins.be
http://www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs/
html/crop.pl/bamboo
http://www.inbar.int/
260
M. DAS ET AL.
(unpublished data from S.B) at diVerent eco‐geographical regions of eastern
India indicated a low level of population genetic diversity for these two
species. Similar trend was identified in P. pubescens from Taiwan (Lai and
Hsiao, 1997) and Guadua angustifolia from Colombia (Marulanda et al.,
2002). It is quite possible that only a few clones of individual species acted
as the genetic donor within a particular geographic area and thus resulted in
low level among population genetic variability. On the other hand, relatively
higher clonal variation was found in Sasa senanensis from Japan (Suyama
et al., 2000) and G. amplexifolia from Colombia (Marulanda et al., 2002).
It indicates that the diVerential reproductive systems might have influence on
population genetic diversity in diVerent bamboo species, since it is expected
that the allogamous species are usually more diverse than the autogamous
ones. However, further studies are required to better understand emphatically
the level of population genetic diversity and clonal structure in bamboo.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The financial support of the Council of Scientific & Industrial Research, New
Delhi, India [Grant No. 38 (1062)/03/EMR‐II] is gratefully acknowledged.
MD acknowledges the resident research associateship award from National
Research Council, USA, while this review was written. We are thankful to the
Director, Botanical Survey of India, Howrah, for allowing us to collect and
study the bamboo germplasms, Mr. Pandey, B.S.I, for plant identification,
Johan Gielis for providing useful literatures, R. B. Majumder, Jayadri Ghosh,
John Fowler, OSU, Jason Londo, EPA, and Gerald F. Guala, USDA,
NRCS, National Plant Data Centre for helpful discussions. We also thank
the editors of this volume for giving us the opportunity to contribute.
REFERENCES
Alvarez, I. and Wendel, J. F. (2003). Ribosomal ITS sequences and plant phylogenetic
inference. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 29, 417–434.
Baldwin, B. G., Sanderson, M. J., Porter, J. M., Wojciechowski, M. F.,
Campbell, C. S. and Donoghue, M. J. (1995). The ITS region of nuclear
ribosomal DNA: A valuable source of evidence on angiosperm phylogeny.
Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 82, 247–277.
Barker, N. P., Linder, H. P. and Harley, E. H. (1995). Polyphyly of Arundinoideae
(Poaceae): Evidence from rbcL sequence data. Systematic Botany 20,
423–435.
Barkley, N. A., Newman, M. L., Wang, M. L., Hotchkiss, M. W. and Pederson, G. A.
(2005). Assessment of the genetic diversity and phylogenetic relationships of
a temperate bamboo collection by using transferred EST‐SSR markers.
Genome 48, 731–737.
BAMBOO TAXONOMY AND DIVERSITY
261
Bennet, S. S. R. and Gaur, R. C. (1990). ‘‘Thirty Seven Bamboos Growing in India.’’
pp. 17–18. Controller of Publications, Government of India, New Delhi,
India.
Bentham, G. (1881). Notes on Gramineae. Journal of Linnean Society, Botany 19,
14–134.
Bhatt, B. P., Singh, L. B., Singh, K. and Sachan, M. S. (2003). Some commercial edible
bamboo species of North East India: Production, indigenous uses, cost‐
benefit and management strategies. Bamboo Science and Culture 17, 4–20.
Bhattacharya, S., Das, M., Bar, R. and Pal, A. (2006). Morphological and molecular
characterization of Bambusa tulda with a note on flowering. Annals of
Botany 98(3), 529–535.
Brandis, D. (1899). Biological notes on Indian bamboos. Indian Forester 25, 1–25.
Brea, M. and Zucol, A. F. (2007). Guadua zuloagae sp. nov., the first petrified bamboo
culm record from the Ituzaingo formation (Pliocene), Parana basin, Argentina. Annals of Botany 100(4), 711–723.
Bystriakova, N., Kapos, V., Lysenko, I. and Stapleton, C. (2003a). Distribution and
conservation status of forest bamboo biodiversity in the Asia‐Pacific region.
Biodiversity and Conservation 12, 1833–1841.
Bystriakova, N., Kapos, V., Stapleton, C. and Lysenko, I. (2003b). ‘‘Bamboo Biodiversity: Information for Planning Conservation and Management in the
Asia‐Pacific Region.’’ pp. 1–71. UNEP‐World Conservation Monitoring
Center and International Network for Bamboo and Rattan, Cambridge, UK.
Camus, E. G. (1913). ‘‘Les Bambusees‐Monographie, Biologie, Culture, Principaux
Usages.’’ pp. 1–215. Lechevalier, Paris.
Chao, C. S. and Renvoize, S. A. (1989). Revision of species described under Arundinaria (Gramineae) in Southeast Asia and Africa. Kew Bulletin 44, 349–367.
Chao, C. S., Chu, C. D. and Hsiung, W. Y. (1980). A revision of some genera and
species of Chinese bamboos. Acta Phytotaxonomica Sinica 18, 20–36.
Chua, K. S., Soong, B. C. and Tan, H. T. W. (1996). ‘‘The Bamboos of Singapore.’’
pp. 30–32. IPGRI, Regional OYce for Asia Pacific and Oceanic, Singapore.
Clark, L. G. and Judziewicz, E. J. (1996). The grass subfamilies Anomochlooideae
and Pharoideae (Poaceae). Taxon 45(4), 641–645.
Clark, L. G., Zhang, W. and Wendel, J. F. (1995). A phylogeny of the grass family
(Poaceae) based on ndhF sequence data. Systematic Botany 20, 436–460.
Clark, L. G., Judziewicz, E. J. and Tyrrel, C. D. (2007). Aulonemia ximenae
(Poaceae: Bambusoideae), a new northern Andean species with fimbriate
sheath margin. Bamboo Science and Culture 20, 1–6.
Clayton, W. D. and Renvoize, S. A. (1986). ‘‘Genera Graminum, Grasses of the
World.’’ Her Majesty’s Stationery OYce, London.
Crepet, W. L. and Feldman, G. D. (1991). The earliest remains of grasses in the fossil
record. American Journal of Botany 78, 1010–1014.
Cummings, M. P., King, L. M. and Kellogg, E. A. (1994). Slipped‐strand mispairing
in a plastid gene: rpoC2 in grasses (Poaceae). Molecular and Biological
Evolution 11, 1–8.
Das, M., Bhattacharya, S. and Pal, A. (2005). Generation and characterization of
SCARs by cloning and sequencing of RAPD products: A strategy for species
specific marker development in bamboo. Annals of Botany 95, 835–841.
Das, M., Bhattacharya, S., Basak, J. and Pal, A. (2007). Phylogenetic relationships
among the bamboo species as revealed by morphological characters and
polymorphism analyses. Biologia Plantarum 51(4), 667–672.
Davis, J. I. and Soreng, R. J. (1993). Phylogenetic structure in the grass family
(Poaceae) as inferred from chloroplast DNA restriction site variation.
American Journal of Botany 80, 1444–1454.
262
M. DAS ET AL.
Ding, Y. (1998). ‘‘Systematic Studies on Phyllostachys.’’ pp. 1–120. Ph. D. Dissertation. Nanjing University, China.
Dransfield, S. (1992). A new species of Racemobambos (Gramineae: Bambusoideae)
from Sulawesi with notes on generic delimitation. Kew Bulletin 47, 707–711.
Dransfield, S. and Widjaja, E. A. (1995). ‘‘Plant Resources of Southeast Asia
PROSEA no: 7‐Bamboos.’’ Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, Holland.
Doebley, J., Durbin, M., Golenberg, E. M., Clegg, M. T. and Ma, D. P. (1990)
Evolutionary analysis of the large subunit of carboxylase (rbcL) nucleotide
sequence data among the grasses (Poaceae). Evolution 44, 1097–1108.
Duvall, M. R. and Morton, B. R. (1996). Molecular phylogenetics of Poaceae: An
expanded analysis of rbcL sequence data. Molecular Phylogenetics and
Evolution 5, 353–358.
Filgueiras, T. S. (2002). Herbaceous plant communities. In ‘‘The Cerrados of Brazil’’
(P. Oliveira and R. J. Marquis, eds.), pp. 121–139. Columbia University
Press, New York.
Filgueiras, T. S. and Goncalves, A. P. S. (2004). A checklist of the basal grasses and
bamboos in Brazil. Bamboo Science and Culture 18(1), 7–18.
Filgueiras, T. S. and Londoño, X. (2006). A giant new Guadua (Poaceae:Bambusoideae) from central Brazil. In ‘‘Seminário Nacional de Bambus’’ (J. G. de
Almeida and A. A. Teixeira, eds.), pp. 27–32. Universidade de Brası́lia,
Brası́lia.
Flora of China (2007). Poaceae. Journal of the Torrey Botanical Society 22, 1–733.
Friar, E. and Kochert, G. (1991). Bamboo germplasm screening with nuclear restriction fragment length polymorphisms. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 82,
697–703.
Friar, E. and Kochert, G. (1994). A study of genetic variation and evolution of
Phyllostachys (Bambusoideae: Poaceae) using nuclear restriction fragment
length polymorphisms. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 89, 265–270.
Gamble, J. S. (1896). ‘‘Bambuseae of British India.’’ Annals of the Royal Botanical
Garden, Calcutta, India.
Ganapathy, P. M. (1997). Sources of non wood fiber for paper, board and panels
production: Status, trends and prospects for India. In ‘‘Asia‐Pacific Forestry Sector Outlook Study Working Paper Series, Working Paper No: APFSOS/WP/10.’’ pp. 1–59. Forestry Policy and Planning Division, Rome
Regional OYce for Asia and the Pacific, Bangkok.
Gaut, B. S., Clark, L. G., Wendel, J. F. and Muse, S. V. (1997). Comparisons of
the molecular evolutionary process at rbcL and ndhF in the grass family
(Poaceae). Molecular Biology and Evolution 14(7), 769–777.
Ghorai, A. and Sharma, A. (1980). Cyto taxonomy of Indian Bambuseae II: Dendrocalameae and Melocanneae. Acta Botanica Indica 8(2), 134–138.
Gielis, J. (1998). Upstream fundamental research in bamboo‐possibilities and directions. Keynote lecture at Vth International Bamboo Congress, San Jose,
Costa Rica.
Gielis, J., Valente, P., Bridts, C. and Verbelen, J. P. (1997a). Estimation of DNA
content of bamboos using flow cytometry and confocal laser scanning
microscopy (CLSM). In ‘‘The Bamboos’’ (G. Chapman, ed.), pp. 215–223.
Linnean Society Symposium Series 19, Academic press, London.
Gielis, J., Everaert, I. and De, L. M. (1997b). Analysis of genetic variability and relationships in Phyllostachys using random amplified polymorphic DNA. In ‘‘The
Bamboos’’ (G. Chapman, ed.), pp. 107–124. Academic Press, London.
Gielis, J., Peeters, H., Gillis, K., Oprins, J. and Debergh, P. (2001). Tissue culture
strategies for genetic improvement of bamboo. Acta Horticulturae 552,
195–203.
BAMBOO TAXONOMY AND DIVERSITY
263
Gielly, L. and Taberlet, P. (1994). The Use of Chloroplast DNA to Resolve Plant
Phylogenies: Noncoding versus rbcL Sequences. Molecular Biology and
Evolution 11(5), 769–777.
Grass Phylogeny Working Group (2001). Phylogeny and sub‐familial classification of
the grasses. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 88, 373–457.
Guala, G. F. (2003). A new genus of bamboos from the Cerrados of Brazil. Bamboo
Science and Culture 17, 1–3.
Guala, G., Bogler, D., Sadle, J. and Francisco‐Ortega, J. (2000). Molecular evidence
for polyphyly in the genus Apoclada (Poaceae: Bambusoideae). Bamboo
Science and Culture 14(1), 15–20.
Gui, Y. J., Wang, S., Quan, L. Y., Zhou, C. P., Long, S. B., Zheng, H. J., Jin, L.,
Zhang, X. Y., Ma, N. X. and Fan, L. J. (2007). Genome size and sequence
composition of moso bamboo: A comparative study. Science in China Series
C: Life Science 50(5), 1–6.
Guo, Z. H. and Li, D. Z. (2004). Phylogenetics of the Thamnocalamus group and its
allies (Gramineae: Bambusoideae): Inference from the sequences of GBSSI
gene and ITS spacer. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 30, 1–12.
Guo, Z. H., Chen, Y. Y., Li, D. Z. and Yang, J. B. (2001). Genetic variation and
evolution of the Alpine bamboos (Poaceae: Bambusoideae) using DNA
sequence data. Journal of Plant Research 114, 315–322.
Guo, Z. H., Chen, Y. Y. and Li, D. Z. (2002). Phylogenetic studies on Thamnocalamus
group and its allies (Bambusoideaae: Poaceae) based on ITS sequence data.
Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 22, 20–30.
Hamby, R. K. and Zimmer, E. A. (1988). Ribosomal RNA sequences for inferring
phylogeny within the grass family (Poaceae). Plant Systematics and Evolution 160, 29–37.
Hilu, K. W., Alice, L. A. and Liang, H. (1999). Phylogeny of Poaceae inferred from
matK sequences. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 86, 835–851.
Hodkinson, T. R., Renvoize, S. A., Chonghaile, G. N., Stapleton, C. M. A. and
Chase, M. W. (2000). A comparison of ITS nuclear rDNA sequence data
and AFLP markers for phylogenetic studies in Phyllostachys (Bambusoideae, Poaceae). Journal of Plant Research 113, 259–269.
Holttum, R. E. (1956). The classification of bamboos. Phytomorphology 6(1), 73–90.
Holttum, R. E. (1958). Bamboos of Malaya peninsula. Garden’s Bulletin, Singapore
16, 1–135.
Hsiao, J. Y. and Rieseberg, L. H. (1994). Population genetic structure of Yushania
niitakayamensis (Bambusoideae, Poaceae) in Taiwan. Molecular Ecology 3,
201–208.
Hsiao, C., Jacobs, S. W. L., Barker, N. P. and Chatterton, N. J. (1998). A molecular
phylogeny of the subfamily Arundinoideae (Poaceae) based on sequences of
rDNA. Australian Systematic Botany 11, 41–52.
Hsu, C. C. (1967). Preliminary chromosome studies on the vascular plants of
Taiwan (1). Taiwania 13, 117–130.
Hsu, C. C. (1972). Preliminary chromosome studies on the vascular plants of
Taiwan (5). Taiwania 17, 48–62.
Huttley, G. A., McRae, A. F. and Clegg, M. T. (1995). Molecular evolution of the Ac/
Ds transposable element family in pearl millet and other grasses. Genetics
139, 1411–1419.
Isagi, Y., Shimada, K., Kushima, H., Tanaka, N., Nagao, A., Ishikawa, T., OnoDera, H.
and Watanabe, S. (2004). Clonal structure and flowering traits of a bamboo
[Phyllostachys pubescens (Mazel) Ohwi] stand grown from a simultaneous
flowering as revealed by AFLP analysis. Molecular Ecology 13(7), 2017–2021.
264
M. DAS ET AL.
Janzen, D. H. (1976). Why bamboos wait so long to flower. Annual Review of Ecology
and Systematics 7, 347–391.
Jie, Y. G., Sheng, W., Yan, L. Q., Ping, C. Z., Bao, S. L., Jun, H. Z., Liang, J.,
Yin, X. Z., Xun, N. M. A. and Jiang, L. F. (2007). Genome size and
sequence composition of moso bamboo: a comparative study. Science in
China Series C: Life Science, 50(5), 1–6.
Judziewicz, E. J., Clark, L. G., Londono, X. and Stern, M. J. (1999). ‘‘American
Bamboos.’’ Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
Kelchner, S. A. and Clark, L. G. (1997). Molecular evolutions and phylogenetic
utility of the chloroplast rpl 16 intron in Chusquea and the Bambusoideae
(Poaceae). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 8, 385–397.
Kellogg, E. A. and Campbell, C. S. (1987). Phylogenetic analyses of the Gramineae.
In ‘‘Grass Systematics and Evolution’’ (T. R. Soderstrom, K. W. Hilu,
C. S. Campbell and M. E. Barkworth, eds.), pp. 217–224. Smithsonian
Institution, Washington, DC, USA.
Kellogg, E. A. and Watson, L. (1993). Phylogenetic studies of a large data set.
Bambusoideae, Andropogonodae, and Pooideae (Gramineae). Botanical
Review 59(4), 273–343.
Keng, P. C. (1983). A revision of genera of bamboos from the old world. IV. Journal
of Bamboo Research 2(2), 1–17.
Keng, P. C. and Wang, Z. P. (1996). ‘‘Flora Reipublicae Popularis Sinicae Tomus
9(1).’’ Science Press, Beijing, China.
Keukeleire, P. D., Schepper, S. D., Gielis, J. and Gerats, T. (2004). A PCR‐based
assay to detect hAT‐like transposon sequences in plants. Chromosome
Research 12, 117–223.
Khatta, V. and Katoch, B. S. (1983). Nutrient composition of some fodder tree leaves
available in sub‐mountainous region of Himachal Pradesh. Indian Forester
109, 17–24.
Kurz, S. (1876). Bamboo and its use. Indian Forester 1(3), 219–269.
Kwon, S. J., Park, K. C., Kim, J. H., Lee, J. K. and Kim, N. S. (2005). Rim 2/Hipa
CACTA transposon display a new genetic marker technique in Oryza
species. BMC Genetics 6, 15.
Lai, C. C. and Hsiao, J. Y. (1997). Genetic variation of Phyllostachys pubescens
(Bambusoideae, Poaceae) in Taiwan based on DNA polymorphisms.
Botanical Bulletin of Academia Sinica 38, 145–152.
Li, D. Z. (1997). The Flora of China Bambusoideae project: Problems and current
understanding of bamboo taxonomy in China. In ‘‘The Bamboos’’
(G. P. Chapman, ed.), pp. 61–81. Academic Press, London, United
Kingdom.
Liang, H. and Hilu, W. (1996). Applications of the matK gene sequences to grass
systematics. Canadian Journal of Botany 74, 125–134.
Lin, C. S., Lai, Y. H., Sun, C. W., Liu, N. T., Tsay, H. S., Chang, W. C. and
Chen, J. J. W. (2006). Identification of ESTs diVrentially expressed in
green and albino mutant bamboo (Bambusa edulis) by suppressive subtractive hybridization (SSH) and microarray analysis. Plant Cell Tissue and
Organ Culture 86, 169–175.
Litt, M. and Lutty, J. A. (1989). A hypervariable microsatellite revealed by in vitro
amplification of a dinucleotide repeat within the cardiac muscle actin gene.
American Journal of Human Genetics 44, 397–401.
Loh, J. P., Kiew, R., Set, O., Gan, L. H. and Gan, Y. Y. (2000). A study of genetic
variation and relationships within the bamboo subtribe Bambusinae using
amplified fragment length polymorphism. Annals of Botany 85, 607–612.
BAMBOO TAXONOMY AND DIVERSITY
265
Majumdar, R. (1989). Bambusoideae. In ‘‘Florae Indicae Enumeratio: Monocotyledonae’’ (S. Karthikeyan, S. K. Jain, M. P. Nayar and M. Sanjappa, eds.),
pp. 274–254. Botanical Survey of India, Calcutta.
Malcomber, S. T., Preston, J. C., Reinheimer, R., Kossuth, J. and Kellog, E. A.
(2006). Developmental gene evolution and the origin of grass inflorescence
diversity. Advances in Botanical Research 44, 426–481.
Marulanda, M. L., Marquez, P. and Londono, X. (2002). AFLP analysis of Guadua
angustifolia (Poaceae: Bambusoideae) in Columbia with emphasis on the
coVee region. Bamboo Science and Culture 16(1), 32–42.
Mathews, S. and Sharrock, R. A. (1996). The phytochrome gene family in grass
(Poaceae): A phylogeny and evidence that grasses have a subset of the
loci found in dicot angiosperms. Molecular Biology and Evolution 13,
1141–1150.
Mathews, S., Tsai, R. C. and Kellogg, E. A. (2000). Phylogenetic structure in the grass
family (Poaceae): Evidence from the nuclear gene phytochrome B. American
Journal of Botany 87(1), 96–107.
McClure, F. A. (1925). Some observations on the bamboos of Kwangtung. Lingnan
Agricultural Review 3, 40–47.
McClure, F. A. (1934). The inflorescence of Schizostachyum Nees. Journal of the
Washington Academy of Sciences 24, 541–548.
McClure, F. A. (1961). Toward a fuller description of the Bambusoideae (Gramineae). Kew Bulletin 15(2), 321–324.
McClure, F. A. (1966). ‘‘The Bamboos.’’ Harvard University Press, Cambridge,
Massachusetts.
Munro, W. (1868). A monograph of the Bambusaceae, including description of all the
species. Transactions of the Linnean Society of London 26(1), 1–157.
Nadot, S., Bajon, R. and Lejeune, B. (1994). The chloroplast gene rps4 as a tool for
the study of Poaceae phylogeny. Plant Systematics and Evolution 191, 27–38.
Nakai, T. (1925). Two new genera of Bambusaceae, with special remarks on the
related genera growing in eastern Asia. Journal of Arnold Arboretum 6, 151.
Nayak, S. G. R. and Das, P. (2003). Evaluation of the genetic variability in bamboo
using RAPD markers. Plant, Soil and Environment 49(1), 24–28.
Nayak, S. and Rout, G. R. (2005). Isolation and characterization of microsatellites in
Bambusa arundinacea and cross species amplification in other bamboos.
African Journal of Biotechnology 4(2), 151–156.
Nees von Esenbeck, C. G. D. (1835). Bambuseae brasilienses: Recensuit et alias in
India Orientalis provenientes adjecit. Linnaea 9, 461–494.
Oliveira, R. P. (2006). Estudos taxonômicos, filogenéticos e biossistemáticos em
Raddia Bertol. (Poaceae:Bambusoideae:Olyreae), Ph. D. dissertationUniversidade Estadual de Feira de Santana, Bahia, Brazil[Taxonomic,
phylogenetic and biosystematic studies on Raddia].
Olmstead, R. G. and Palmer, J. D. (1994). Chloroplast DNA systematics: A review of
methods and data analysis. American Journal of Botany 81(9), 1205–1224.
Paran, I. and Michelmore, R. W. (1993). Development of reliable PCR based markers
linked to downy mildew resistance genes in lettuce. Theoretical and Applied
Genetics 85, 985–993.
Park, S. B. and Kwon, S. D. (1998). Development of new uses of bamboos (II):
Development of carbonization kiln and schedule investigation for bamboo
charcoal making. FRI Journal of Forest Science 59, 17–24.
Park, K. C., Lee, J. K., Kim, N. H., Shin, Y. B., Lee, J. H. and Kim, N. S. (2003).
Genetic variation in Oryza species detected by MITE‐AFLP. Genes and
Genetic Systems 78, 235–243.
266
M. DAS ET AL.
Parodi, L. R. (1961). La taxonomica de las Gramineae Argentinas a la luz de las
investigaciones mas recientes. In ‘‘Recent Advances in Botany.’’ pp. 125–130.
University of Toronto Press, Toronto.
Pennisi, E. (2007). Wanted: A barcode for plants. Science 318, 190–191.
Pohl, R. W. and Clark, L. G. (1992). New chromosome counts for Chusquea and
Aulonemia (Poaceae: Bambusoideae). American Journal of Botany 79(4),
478–480.
Poinar, G. O. and Columbus, J. T. (1992). Adhesive grass spikelet with mammalian
hair in Dominican amber. First fossil evidence of epizoochory. Experientia
48, 906–908.
Prat, H. (1960). Vers une classification naturelle des graminhes. Bulletin de la Societe
Botanique de France 107, 32–79.
Renvoize, S. A. and Clayton, W. D. (1992). Classification and evolution of grasses. In
‘‘Grass Evolution and Domestication’’ (G. P. Chapman, ed.), pp. 3–37.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.
Riviere, A. and Riviere, C. (1879). ‘‘Les Bambous.: au Siege de la Societe d’Acclimatation.’’ Paris.
Roshevits, R. Y. (1946). Sistema zlakov v svyazi s ikh evolyutsiei. Leningard:
Komarav Botanical Institute, U.S.S.R. Academy of Sciences. Leningrad
[Portuguese translation by T. Sendulsky, Instituto de Botlnica, Slo Paulo,
Brazil, 1969. Evolucao e sistemitica das gramineas. Boletim do Instituto de
Botlnica No. 5, 1–20.
Ruiyang, C. (2003). ‘‘Chromosome Atlas of Major Economic Plants Genome in
China Vol. 4: Chromosome Atlas of Various Bamboo Species.’’ pp. 646.
Science Press, Beijing.
Scurlock, J. M. O., Dayton, D. C. and Hames, B. (2000). Bamboo: An overlooked
biomass resource? Biomass and Bioenergy 19, 229–244.
Small, R. L., Ryburn, J. A., Cronn, R. C., Seelanan, T. and Wendel, J. F. (1998). The
tortoise and the hare: Choosing between noncoding plastome and nuclear
ADH sequences for phylogeny reconstruction in a recently diverged plant
group. American Journal of Botany 85, 1301–1315.
Soderstrom, T. R. (1981). Some evolutionary trends in the Bambusoideae (Poaceae).
Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 68, 15–47.
Soderstrom, T. R. and Ellis, R. P. (1982). Taxonomic status of the endemic South
African bamboo. Thamnocalamus tessellatus. Bothalia 14(1), 53–67.
Soderstrom, T. R. and Ellis, R. P. (1987). The position of bamboo genera and allies in
a system of grass classification. In ‘‘Grass Systematics and Evolution’’
(T. R. Soderstrom, K. W. Hilu, C. S. Campbell and M. E. Barkworth,
eds.). Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC & London.
Soderstrom, T. R. and Ellis, R. P. (1988). The woody bamboos (Poaceae: Bambusoideae) of Sri Lanka: A morphological anatomical study. Smithsonian
Contributions to Botany 72, 1–75.
Soderstrom, T. R., and Young, S. T. (1983). A guide to collecting bamboo. Annals of
the Missouri Botanical Garden, 70, 128–136.
Stapleton, C. M. A. (1991). ‘‘A Morphological Investigation of Some Himalayan
Bamboos with an Enumeration of Taxa in Nepal and Bhutan.’’ Ph.D. thesis,
University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Stapleton, C. M. A. (1994a). The bamboos of Nepal and Bhutan, Part I: Bambusa,
Dendrocalamus, Melocanna, Cephalostachyum, Teinostachyum, and Pseudostachyum (Gramineae: Poaceae, Bambusoideae). Edinburgh Journal of
Botany 51, 1–32.
BAMBOO TAXONOMY AND DIVERSITY
267
Stapleton, C. M. A. (1994b). The bamboos of Nepal and Bhutan, Part II: Arundinaria,
Thamnocalamus, Borinda and Yushania (Gramineae: Poaceae, Bambusoideae). Edinburgh Journal of Botany 51, 275–295.
Stapleton, C. M. A. (1994c). The bamboos of Nepal and Bhutan, Part III: Drepanostachyum, Himalayacalamus, Ampelocalamus, Neomicrocalamus and Chimnobambusa (Gramineae: Poaceae, Bambusoideae). Edinburgh Journal of
Botany 51, 310–330.
Stapleton, C. M. A. (1997). The morphology of woody bamboos. In ‘‘The Bamboos’’
(G. P. Chapman, ed.), pp. 251–267. Academic Press, London.
Stenseth, N. C., Viljugrein, H., Saitoh, T., Hansen, T. F., Kittilsen, M. O.,
Bolviken, E. and Glockner, F. (2003). Seasonality, density dependence,
and population cycles in Hokkaido voles. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 100(20), 11478–11483.
Sun, Y., Xia, N. and Lin, R. (2005). Phylogenetic analysis of Bambusa (Poaceae:
Bambusoideae) based on internal transcribed spacer sequences of nuclear
ribosomal DNA. Biochemical Genetics 43(11/12), 603–612.
Sun, Y., Xia, N. and Stapleton, C. M. A. (2006). Relationships between Bambusa
species (Poaceae, Bambusoideae) revealed by random amplified polymorphic DNA. Biochemical Systematics and Ecology 34, 417–423.
Suyama, Y., Obayashi, K. and Hayashi, I. (2000). Clonal structure in a dwarf
bamboo (Sasa senanensis) population inferred from amplified fragment
length polymorphism (AFLP) fingerprints. Molecular Ecology 9, 901–906.
Tateoka, T. (1957). Miscellaneous papers on the phylogeny of Poaceae (10). Proposition of a new phylogenetic system of Poaceae. Journal of Japanese Botany
32, 275–287.
Thomasson, J. R. (1987). Fossil grasses: 1820–1986 and beyond. In ‘‘Grass Systematics and Evolution’’ (T. R. Soderstrom, K. W. Hilu, C. S. Capmbell and
M. E. Barkworth, eds.), pp. 159–167. Smithsonian Institution Press,
Washington, D.C.
Triplett, J. K., Weakley, A. S. and Clark, L. G. (2006). Hill cane (Arundinaria
appalachiana) a new species of bamboo from the southern Appalachian
Mountains. Sida 22, 79–85.
Tzvelev, N. (1989). The system of grasses (Poaceae) and their evolution. The Botanical
Review 55, 141–203.
Usui, H. (1957). Morphological studies on the prophyll of Japanese bamboos.
The Botanical Magazine, Tokyo 70, 223–227.
Vicient, C. M., Jaaskelainen, M. J., Kalendar, R. and Schulman, A. H. (2001). Active
transposons are common feature of grass genomes. Plant Physiology 125,
1283–1292.
Vos, P., Hogers, R., Bleeker, M., Reijans, M., van de Lee, T., Hornes, M., Frijters, A.,
Pot, J., Peleman, J., Kuiper, M. and Zabeau, M. (1995). AFLP, a new
technique for DNA fingerprinting. Nucleic Acids Research 23, 4407–4414.
Wagner, A., Blackstone, N., Cartwright, P., Dick, M., Misof, B., Snow, P.,
Wagner, G. P., Bartels, J., Murtha, M. and Pendleton, J. (1994). Surveys
of gene families using polymerase chain reaction: PCR selection and PCR
drift. Systematic Biology 43, 250–261.
Wang, C. P., Yu, Z. H., Ye, G. H., Chu, C. D. and Chao, C. S. (1980). A taxonomic study
of Phyllostachys in China. Acta Phytotaxonomica Sinica 18(15–19), 168–193.
Watson, L. and Dallwitz, M. J. (1992). ‘‘The Grass Genera of the World.’’ CAB
International, Wallingford, Oxon, England.
Wen, T. H. (1986). Some issues of taxa of Bambusoideae in China. Journal of Bamboo
Research 5(2), 10–27.
268
M. DAS ET AL.
Wessler, S. R., Bureau, T. and White, S. (1995). LTR‐retrotransposons and MITEs:
Important players in the evolution of plant genomes. Current Opinion in
Genetics and Development 5, 814–821.
White, T. J., Bruns, T., Lee, S. and Taylor, J. (1990). Amplification and direct
sequencing of fungal ribosomal RNA genes for phylogenetics. In ‘‘PCR
Protocols: A Guide to Methods and Applications’’ (M. Innis, D. Gelfand,
J. Sninsky and T. White, eds.), pp. 315–322. Academic Press, San Diego.
Williams, J. G. K., Kubelik, A. R., Livak, K. J., Rafalski, J. A. and Tingey, S. V.
(1990). DNA polymorphisms amplified by arbitrary primers are useful as
genetic markers. Nucleic Acids Research 18, 6531–6535.
Wolfe, A. D. and Randle, C. P. (2004). Recombination, heteroplasmy, haplotype
polymorphism, and paralogy in plastid genes: Implications for plant molecular systematics. Systematic Botany 29(4), 1011–1020.
Wong, K. M. (2004). Bamboo—the amazing grass. A guide to the diversity and study
of bamboos in Southeast Asia. International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI) and Kuala Lumpur, University of Malaya, Malaysia.
Yu, J. K., Rota, M. L., Kantety, R. V. and Sorrells, M. E. (2004). EST derived SSR
markers for comparative mapping in wheat and rice. Molecular Genetics and
Genomics 271, 742–751.
Zhang, W. (2000). Phylogeny of the grass family (Poaceae) from rpl 16 intron
sequence data. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 15(1), 135–146.
Zhang, W. and Clark, L. G. (2000). Phylogeny and classification of the Bambusoideae
(Poaceae). In ‘‘Grasses: Systematics and Evolution’’ (S. W. L. Jacobs and
J. E. Everett, eds.), pp. 35–42. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, Victoria.
Zhang, W., Wendel, J. F. and Clark, L. G. (1997). Bamboozled again! inadvertent
isolation of fungal rDNA sequences from bamboos (Poaceae: Bambusoideae). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 8(2), 205–217.
Samik Bhattacharya